CONTINUED: Democracy on YCM!

[Darth Duelist]

Hi again every1!

YCM Moderators have locked my earlier thread, Democracy on YCM. I was given no reason for which my thread was locked. I wish to continue this topic. Moderators are locking my threads to stop us from having democracy. To see my old thread go to "My First Democracy Thread below or go to the url below:

http://forum.yugiohcardmaker.net/thread-156133.html

No offence to mods, but I personally think they are afraid of an outbreak. I only THINK the moderators are scared, but if you are a mod reading this and find this outrageous, please EXPLAIN why this thread is good or bad thread. If you want to lock this thread, please PM me and tell me why this thread should be locked, in a DETAILED and DESCRIPTIVE way. By detailed and descriptive, I mean something that isn't like this:

----------------------------

USERNAMEHERE

*****

Stupid. Locked.

----------------------------

So if you are reporting this thread, you are reporting for no reason because this thread does not violate any YCM Rules. And if you don't like the idea, instead of giving me a neg, please just tell me. I'm here to negotiate, not start a YCM War. YCMaker, if you're out there, please read this thread. Anyways, if this thread gets locked, i'll find out if the mods are scared or not.

[spoiler=My First Democracy Thread]

Hi guys! I'm pretty sure all of you know that moderators can ban people that do not follow the YCM Rules. The Moderators have the authority to ban most members, without asking for anyone's permission. If you ask me, this is like the Roman Republic. Caesar, Crassus, and Pompey ruled the Roman Empire together. Its like a group of dictators are ruling YCM. I want DEMOCRACY! I think that we should have an important thread, all about bans, reports, and stuff like that. When a thread is reported, a moderator could post why it was reported on the important thread. There would then be a vote to decide if the person should be banned or not. There should also be a vote about the consequences (how much % warning level, should they be banned permanently. So how about you guys?

What do you think?

Do you support me or not? Why do you (not) support me?

 

Thanks for reading this thread if you did.

 

 

So anyways, please comment. If you like it, feel free to give a pos. rep. Don't give me a neg rep unless you want to be a minimod. No one likes Minimods.

[Legend Zero]

Retarded thread is retarded.

 

Most members on the forum only make cards and could care less about if someone gets banned or any of the other sections. What would happen is that disagreements would start about someone needing banned and a "vote" takes place and those who don't care say "oh might as well not ban him." and this will start more spam and flame wars.[/topic]

[Lemniscate]

Democracy is an incredibly stupid form of government, as has been proven by every democracy in history, all of which crash and die away.

The people can't be trusted to make an informed and well considered decision on these things, and giving them the power to do so is likely to give rise to anarchy on the site, as people begin to attempt to create ways that they can sway a vote in their favor, or just make decisions that end up being entirely bad for the site.

On an internet forum, where there is no pre-screening for qualities for members, it is much more stable to have a organization based on the decisions of the site's creator, and the people they appoint to assist them.

[DeREVOLUTION]

I'm really happy for you. I'm gonna let you finish, but let me get this straight...you want DEMOCRACY on a Yugioh forum? Good luck with that >.

[Great Unclean One: VK]

I both agree and disagree with you.

 

We should VOTE for a mod. Mods should also post a App why, and people get to vote wether or wether not to make that s/he gets modhood.

 

I disagree because then mods would be dead, except for the job of locking threads. But I also think if we do have a ban court, Mods can still give warning %. And if it's 100%, auto-perma ban.

 

But I'm also for a Un-ban court. Though the question is how should they appeal if their banned. Thus nulling this suggestion.

 

So basically,

 

YES, for voting and appointing for a mod, not to mention a Ban Court.

 

NO, for complete democracy, even though I like this form of goverment, unless mods are the only ones allowed to give Warning %s, and lock threads. Also, that they can perma ban if someone's warning is at 100%. Then I'm all for it.

[-Griffin]

This whole thread is rather amusing. People are trying to turn YCM into the bloody Holy Roman Empire and have a Ban Court? Gawd, what is wrong with you people. If someone breaks the rules, it's their own fault. It's not a right that people have to view this site - they can always view another if they don't deserve to be posting here.

The mods are trusted people who can ban members who make the site less enjoyable for others. There's nothing wrong with this system. Chances are we'd see a member's activity suddenly get a lot worse when a poll was brought up, lack of support here.

[OMGAKITTY]

I think its a good idea. Popular members like me can then exert our influence over idiot newb members and cause mass anarchy and overall abuse the system, and no one can stop us, because we control the majority.

[Great Unclean One: VK]

alright, but what about voting a mod? have a sub sect, people post apps, people read it. Then they vote wether they believe the user is worthy of being a mod.

 

example app:

 

User:

Reasons for being a Mod:

What have you contributed to YCM:

etc...

 

i know it doesn't look like a good app, but we'll need to ask some mods what they look for in a mod.

[OMGAKITTY]

alright' date=' but what about voting a mod? have a sub sect, people post apps, people read it. Then they vote wether they believe the user is worthy of being a mod.

 

example app:

 

User:

Reasons for being a Mod:

What have you contributed to YCM:

etc...

 

i know it doesn't look like a good app, but we'll need to ask some mods what they look for in a mod.

[/quote']

 

WILLIEH4MOD!

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

alright' date=' but what about voting a mod? have a sub sect, people post apps, people read it. Then they vote wether they believe the user is worthy of being a mod.

 

example app:

 

User:

Reasons for being a Mod:

What have you contributed to YCM:

etc...

 

i know it doesn't look like a good app, but we'll need to ask some mods what they look for in a mod.

[/quote']

 

This MIGHT be a good way to choose mods, but you should make it that they've been here at least 6 months and are pretty good members that contribute in a positive way.

 

Sorry OMGAKITTY, Willieh doesn't qualify.

----

 

On-topic: I support, even though most of the mods are OK to me.

[Guest JoshIcy]

Democracy in Government > Democracy online.

Unreasonable Rallying much?

[Cin]

Yes because we really HAVE time to post why posts where reported. Have you seen how many posts get reported in a day, has to be 70+. Mainly they're just topic locks, and section moves so why do you need to have them posted in an 'important' thread. Also some members we can't wait for people to vote if they should be banned, they have to be banned straight away.

 

Most of the time we don't auto ban members unless they've clearly broken the worst of the rules. The rest of the time its repeated misbehavior that gets a ban or the warning level hits 100.

 

If we go for your plan, what is the point of having mods?

 

The vote a mod bad idea, while members may see a member as suitable for a role, it will allow for members who could possibly power abuse and who are totally unsuitable getting on.

 

Democracy is for RL, not Children Card Game's Forums.

[dudefarmer]

democracy is good in canada or the u.s. everyone is content with the idea of them choosing the decisions. it is run well due to the fact, the government has a lot to lose if they make to many bad decisions. but you are young infact have nothing to lose and everyone will make bad decisions over and over again knowing you must please others is the key to democracy and no one cares about each other here so there you go, democracy in a nut shell.

[Brushfire]

If this was to actually happen, half the members will be rallying for the unbanning of Draco Straybyrn.

 

Oh, and this:

 

Democracy in Government > Democracy online.

Unreasonable Rallying much?

[Dark Mousy]

Even Democracy in Government is not always the best. Even the United States ran a socialist style for over 30 years, (pay attention to the word style) where the government controlled the prices.

 

This type of Socialism existed in England, France, Austria, Canada, Finland, etc.

[OMGAKITTY]

Yes because we really HAVE time to post why posts where reported. Have you seen how many posts get reported in a day' date=' has to be 70+. Mainly they're just topic locks, and section moves so why do you need to have them posted in an 'important' thread. Also some members we can't wait for people to vote if they should be banned, they have to be banned straight away.

 

Most of the time we don't auto ban members unless they've clearly broken the worst of the rules. The rest of the time its repeated misbehavior that gets a ban or the warning level hits 100.

 

If we go for your plan, what is the point of having mods?

 

The vote a mod bad idea, while members may see a member as suitable for a role, it will allow for members who could possibly power abuse and who are totally unsuitable getting on.

 

[b']Democracy is for RL, not Children Card Game's Forums.[/b]

 

lol

ITT: Direct Democracy = USA.

 

Fail.

[六兆年と一夜物語]

This just fails harder then Kirby releasing Nightmare.

 

Do you see my point?

[dudefarmer]

if you try to run democracy on YCM it will rapidly turn into communism

[六兆年と一夜物語]

Even the 1-star is right.

[Dark Mousy]

Well, that happened, pretty much in the India.

[dudefarmer]

see the key to democracy is that if you make big mistakes, in other words bad decisions every one will hate you and you will be voted out, there you can lose your position communism is run by a weak futile government that has nothing to lose they can make bad choices; if the people rebel they have the military to back them up and protect them, but sooner or later the military is going to rebel as well so there you have what YCM will turn into, right now we should be happy and content with monarchy and be thankful it isn't anarchy.

---

ok sorry that was a mouthful, i will post what it means later

[Poseidon©]

God dammit kid, this is forum/website. NOT A GOVERNMENT. Just let the mods do their jobs, they don't have anything better to do anyway.

 

To quote Legend Zero:

 

Most members on the forum only make cards and could care less about if someone gets banned or any of the other sections. What would happen is that disagreements would start about someone needing banned and a "vote" takes place and those who don't care say "oh might as well not ban him." and this will start more spam and flame wars.[/topic]

[Artix_Von_Kreiger]

Democracy is an incredibly stupid form of government' date=' as has been proven by every democracy in history, all of which crash and die away.

The people can't be trusted to make an informed and well considered decision on these things, and giving them the power to do so is likely to give rise to anarchy on the site, as people begin to attempt to create ways that they can sway a vote in their favor, or just make decisions that end up being entirely bad for the site.

On an internet forum, where there is no pre-screening for qualities for members, it is much more stable to have a organization based on the decisions of the site's creator, and the people they appoint to assist them.

[/quote']

 

Actually, the only reason they crash is because of the congress. The congress is now 75% democrats, and ever since the democrats got oversight of the businesses and goverment the economy crashed. I'm not blaming them or anything, but i'm just saying they could have done a better job.

 

I think it's a good idea, and I support.

[OMGAKITTY]

Democracy is an incredibly stupid form of government' date=' as has been proven by every democracy in history, all of which crash and die away.

The people can't be trusted to make an informed and well considered decision on these things, and giving them the power to do so is likely to give rise to anarchy on the site, as people begin to attempt to create ways that they can sway a vote in their favor, or just make decisions that end up being entirely bad for the site.

On an internet forum, where there is no pre-screening for qualities for members, it is much more stable to have a organization based on the decisions of the site's creator, and the people they appoint to assist them.

[/quote']

 

Actually, the only reason they crash is because of the congress. The congress is now 75% democrats, and ever since the democrats got oversight of the businesses and goverment the economy crashed. I'm not blaming them or anything, but i'm just saying they could have done a better job.

 

I think it's a good idea, and I support.

 

GOOD GOD. FOR THE LAST TIME, THE UNITED STATES IS NOT A DIRECT DEMOCRACY.

/noobswhothinkitis

[Artix_Von_Kreiger]

I know it isn't. It's a representative democracy.