Religion Group Hosts Proposal (Please vote by Thursday at 11:59PM EST).
Here is the proposal cooked up in the discussion thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218129
I will be the lead host. Like I said, I will be hands off except to deal with off topic issues and problems between the hosts which I do not anticipate. The people chosen represent both the theist and atheist points of view which was important to many people.
The other hosts are:
muriel_volestrangler
ZombieHorde
cbayer
struggle4progress
We are doing this on the principle of openness. Locking an on-topic thread would also require a unanimous vote of the four other hosts or three of them and myself. Dismissing a host would require a unanimous vote. The point is to make sure that it's very difficult to do anything. It's to keep this place open as much as possible.
This does not safeguard this group from the juries. If someone posts something that is considered "bigoted" by a jury, we can't help you.
Here are the options when voting. You may vote Yes, No, or No Hosts. If you support the proposal, vote yes. If you oppose it, vote no. If you believe there should be no hosts, vote for No Hosts. Yes needs a majority of all votes to pass. All votes must be in by Friday 12/15 at 11:59PM EST. Votes cast after that time will not be counted.
Notes about if hosts are unavailable: a host who wants to lock an ON TOPIC thread should alert on it as if it were a violation of the Statement of Purpose -- but should explain in the comment box that thread is on-topic and should explain the reasons for wanting to lock. all hosts would then automatically get the alert. the other hosts can then alert on the same thread as if it were a violation of the Statement of Purpose and can explain their vote on the lock in the comment box. in a short period of time, the hosts on duty will have voted on the lock, and in a few minutes we'd know who was around and who wasn't: if there was unanimous agreement of the folk around to lock, we'd lock. but the missing hosts will have the alerts in their inboxes -- and when they return to duty then could also vote on the thread. this gives a mechanism for possibly temporary locking: if the thread has been locked and there's only one later host objection to the lock, not overridden by Renew Deal, the locker would unlock; if the thread has been locked and there's only one later host objection to the lock, Renew Deal could override that one objection, and the thread would remain locked; if the thread has been locked and there are two or more later host objections to the lock, the locker would unlock. Renew Deal, as lead host, would be able to remove any locking host who (after reasonable notice) failed to unlock pursuant to this agreement. This also gives a mechanism for chilling a thread temporarily and reopening it later
Thanks to the LGBT forum AGAIN for their leadership on getting people organized. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1137720
Edit: I changed this from Friday to Thursday for two reasons. One is that I thought it was Thursday when I posted this, and the other is that it's pretty clear where this is headed.
= new reply since forum marked as read
...future historians may be interested in the complex progression of my thoughts on this subject. 
I will submit this to admin. 