Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Renew Deal

(85,436 posts)
Wed Dec 14, 2011, 12:03 PM Dec 2011

Religion Group Hosts Proposal (Please vote by Thursday at 11:59PM EST). [View all]

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.

51 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Yes. LAGC Dec 2011 #1
Yes Goblinmonger Dec 2011 #2
Yes (note I am one of the proposed hosts) muriel_volestrangler Dec 2011 #3
Ah, well, I hadn't read your post when I voted "No Hosts" Adsos Letter Dec 2011 #37
You can edit it, if you want muriel_volestrangler Dec 2011 #39
No, that's alright. My initial response was "No Host," until I read your post... Adsos Letter Dec 2011 #40
Yes laconicsax Dec 2011 #4
Yes deacon_sephiroth Dec 2011 #5
Yes. ZombieHorde Dec 2011 #6
Yes, with one condition. Host discussions need to be public. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #7
I think that's fine. Renew Deal Dec 2011 #16
Yes. It would increase the trust if all hosts opinions cleanhippie Dec 2011 #17
Yes - would be honored to work with this group and think Renew Deal is optimal person for the lead. cbayer Dec 2011 #8
yes, but no locking of on-topic threads lazarus Dec 2011 #9
Yes. +1. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #18
yes Thats my opinion Dec 2011 #10
YES Dorian Gray Dec 2011 #11
Yes. Jim__ Dec 2011 #12
Yes, but I will add that I think a mechanism must be put in place to enable "jury" decisions to be humblebum Dec 2011 #13
This message was self-deleted by its author Goblinmonger Dec 2011 #14
We have no control over jury decisions at all cleanhippie Dec 2011 #19
Try Here, Sir The Magistrate Dec 2011 #20
You'd have to take that up with Skinner, et al. Hosts have no power over jury decisions. n/t iris27 Dec 2011 #21
No Hosts. Adsos Letter Dec 2011 #15
Yes. iris27 Dec 2011 #22
Yes. rrneck Dec 2011 #23
No hosts. rug Dec 2011 #24
LOL! Adsos Letter Dec 2011 #50
Yes! Yes please! LiberalAndProud Dec 2011 #25
excellent choices maddezmom Dec 2011 #26
I vote yes - the sooner the better EvolveOrConvolve Dec 2011 #27
+1000 maddezmom Dec 2011 #28
Yes. immoderate Dec 2011 #29
Yes. Tonight definitely highlights the need WhollyHeretic Dec 2011 #30
YES frogmarch Dec 2011 #31
I'm fine with it. But I have to wonder if tonight's little troll/sockpuppet wasn't an... TygrBright Dec 2011 #32
This person posted nasty crap in several other forums that were alerted and hidden and had at least WhollyHeretic Dec 2011 #34
Yes, they were a definite troll EvolveOrConvolve Dec 2011 #35
I wish we were that manipulative. Renew Deal Dec 2011 #43
Oh yes uriel1972 Dec 2011 #33
This message was self-deleted by its author laconicsax Dec 2011 #36
Yes. westerebus Dec 2011 #38
Yes nt WolverineDG Dec 2011 #41
Hell Yes... SidDithers Dec 2011 #42
Whatever. beam me up scottie Dec 2011 #44
Hosts can lock threads. nt ZombieHorde Dec 2011 #45
They cannot prevent jurors from abusing their powers. beam me up scottie Dec 2011 #48
Yes (nt) mr blur Dec 2011 #46
Yes. Nihil Dec 2011 #47
Yes rexcat Dec 2011 #49
Thanks for the support! Renew Deal Dec 2011 #51
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Religion Group Hosts Prop...»Reply #0