Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: Voting system

Posted by Dr. Bob on March 27, 2014, at 3:21:06

In reply to Re: [Decision] Voting system, posted by doxogenic boy on March 25, 2014, at 13:37:48

> Children don't vote on the rules; but citizens vote on the rules.
>
> I take it, then, that we live in a dictatorship; you are the benevolent dictator, and we are the lucky citizens.

Maybe I should rephrase that:

Do the guests get to vote on the party rules? Why or why not?

> If you have a one-size-fits-all blocking scheme, you risk being unfair, because apples and oranges, or various levels of incivility, seem to fair people to merit different severity of response. Such people may be deeply offended by your procrustian measurements.
>
> On the other hand, if you hand out blocks dependent on your evaluation of the severity of the offense, you risk great outbreaks of disagreement from the citizens, and many vitriolic complaints about your judgments. That is a disruption all its own.

Right, so I have something in between.

> Perhaps your scheme would be better served by a different algorithm. For example, the minimum block would be decided by the severity of the incivility, from 1-4 depending on the level of personal attack, or by the perceived harm to either the community or the object of the attack-- and the block lengths could static or immediately ascending, also dependent on the severity of the offense. A repeated minor (1) offense could be 1 week each time. This protects the community from minor abuses, while not seeming a draconian response to such offenses.
>
> On the other hand, a 3 level incivility could begin with a longer base block and could escalate according to your current scheme.
>
> A level 2 incivility could be somewhere in between, perhaps with a shorter intial block and then after several offenses blocks ascending by perhaps 1 1/2 additional length for each added instance.
>
> For the rare 4 level block, you could have a longer intial period, and then deal however you want with further offenses.
>
> Then you wouldn't be guilty of sanctioning anyone's incivility-- because there would be somewhat more fitting of the sanction to the offense, and to the person of the offender and offendee, -- everyone would be treated somewhat individually.

I already take severity into account. I already treat everyone somewhat individually. Though I have only 2 levels, not 4.

> I dont think this system is too complex and would require so much investment of time and thought that it would be onorous-- and it would be much fairer in fact.
>
> Willful

Would you like to give being a deputy a try?

--

> Here on Babble are so many mature and balanced posters that I think it would work with a voting system. What problems do you see with such a voting system for the enforcement of the civility rules?
>
> - doxogenic

In the US there are so many mature and balanced citizens. Do you see any problems with voting in the US?

Bob


a brilliant and reticent Web mastermind -- The New York Times
backpedals well -- PartlyCloudy


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


[1063295]

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Dr. Bob thread:1063193
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140304/msgs/1063295.html