PROPOSAL TO IMPLEMENT DEMOCRACY

[COBOLdinosaur]

If ERT is going to be a democracy; then the community must put the democratic structures in place. It is time to take the next step forward.  Talking about it is fine; but it will not be a reality without positive action.  The proposal to do that is: http://www.expertsrt.com/Council.html

We are not going to waste bandwidth here on the layout of that page or other petty crap. I don't care if you like the look of the page.  Only the content of it matters.  The proposal itself is simple and highlighted in red to make sure all can find it. The rest of that page is support info concerning how we will proceed if the proposal is accepted.  If you have a problem with the election mechanisms, then propose an ammendement.  Don't waste everyones time with posturing and looking for a maybe option if you do not have an ammendment to propose.  

There is no maybe option on this.  The question is simple do we take the first step to becoming a democracy; YES or NO.

An Interim Governing Council is absolutely essential to control and limit the owner of this site; ME. No matter how much I want community decision making; without controls, I will make arbitrary decision that may be in my interests, but not necessarily what is best for the community.  The community will not be able to guide policy if I or anyone else has absolute control without accountability, as is the case with owners and senior admins on other sites.

Right now, we are going to find out if ERT democracy is viable. If ERT members do not care enough to participate; that's okay.  The site can be run as a dictatorship like other help sites. Given the history of such sites it is possible with near absolute certainty to predict what that dictatorship will lead to.  In time ERT management/admins/and other functionaires will become greedy, arrogant, self-centered, and uncaring; just like other sites.

With this proposal every member has a single choice forced on them; with an option to accept two additional responsibilites by voting yes to the first:

• Vote for democracy or against it. There is no in-between option. IMO (not_voting == 'NO')
• Support and vote for the candidates of your choice who you think will serve the community interest well.
• Run for the Interim Governing Council and have a direct hand in deciding what ERT is going to be.  Even those who do not win election will have influence, by having presented their ideas and demonstratd their support for democracy.

There it is.  I have brought us to the edge of democracy. I can't do the next step alone. YOU have to step into democracy from the perimeter.  It has to be your choice. Democracy cannot be imposed.  Either you take control or by default I become the King of ERT.  I don't want to be King.  I just want to be a Mentor helping where I can.  Please take the burden from me.

Roy

[VGR]

"I have brought us to the edge of democracy" : LOL

[VGR]

I agree with your page's contents. I just think the site admin could be elected to an other position. It's not incompatible IMHO.

[COBOLdinosaur]

I just think the site admin could be elected to an other position.

I don't understand what you are saying.  The site admin was never considered to be an elected position. I have legal and financial exposure and as long as that is the case the site admin who has the ultimate privelege on the servers will be me or someone who reports to me.  If at some point the community takes on responsibility for legal and financial liability, then  the choice of Site Admin will be up to the community.

Cd&

[nicholassolutions]

That looks good to me (as does the page design, in fact :wink:). I even know whom I'd like to nominate.

[nicholassolutions]

BTW, It might be worth emailing about this topic, or at least placing an announcement up top.

[COBOLdinosaur]

I am going to put an announcement up in the morning and then I will get the the vorerinfo page setup when we get ready to vote on this.  I'm already workign on code to manage the voting controls.  I can generate the random code just fine so I just have to set up an election table and populate it.  Then we will send out the codes.

The page for voting is simple.  you have t be logged in to vote, so you get authenticated and your one time code allows you to vote.  Balancing is just queries agains the vote database at the end.  

When I was on EAB over at TOS we propsed an elected board several times and it always got shot donw because it was to complex and difficult to secure.  It's not; they just did not want the community deciding who would be on the board, but even with getting to select them himself Austin could not get even one EAB member to support the unlimited points nonsense that turned it into a game; and breed the moron $10timmys that ran off people like Sean and Mike.

An elect Governing Council is the strangest safeguard we can put in place until we are ready to expand to full size.  We just need to have that base to build on.

[VGR]

I just think the site admin could be elected to an other position.

I don't understand what you are saying. [...]
Cd&

All eligible voters except the Site Administrator and Election officials are eligible to run for the Interim Governing Council

[nicholassolutions]

Presumably the Site Admin will have the ability to break tied votes (and otherwise would be either out-numbered, or adding a 'useless' vote to decided issue)...so effectively he is part of  the Council...

[VGR]

just a quick opinion : I think the site could as wellr emain an "enlighted autocracy" run by an elite of 1 or 2 persons. It always works better this way. Don't forget that it has been proved that whenever you end up with three (3) persons or more to take decisions, the difficulty of reaching a compromise is geometrically higher. And the more the deciders are numerous, the more likely the compromise will be unsatisfactory to all deciders, and the more unsatisfied (annoying) people there will be at the end.

If running the site gives you too much trouble & work (which I understand), then perhaps rotating the responsibilities from week to week or month to month between a small set of cooptated peers is good enough.

[nicholassolutions]

I agree with a lot of that, at least inasmuch as it means the governing council should not get too large....that's something we'll have to figure out as we go forward.

[Huntress]

Agreed.

[COBOLdinosaur]

I think the site could as wellr emain an "enlighted autocracy" run by an elite of 1 or 2 persons.

Of course, we could adopt such a model, and do things by following the herd.  That is the way many sites are already managed.  There is nothing unique or special about them.  There are thousands of dead forums and help site scattered across the Internet.  There are also some that are marginally successful with that model.

We are looking to do something different, and you don't do that by following; you do it by leading.

DMOZ is successful because they took a unique approach to directory editing.  Google is successful because they have a unique indexing method.  Sourceforge is successful because of a unique method of collaboration.  Digg is successful because found a new way to analyze and comment information.  The list of innovative successes can go on for a long time.  

Yes you can be successful by doing what everyone else is doing; or you can break new ground and succeed or fail.  Many of the members of ERT are here because they don't like the way other help sites and forums are run.  Maybe a democratic model will not be any better; the only way to find out is to try it. If I wanted to play safe and just make money I would have just expanded my personal site, added some free stuff and loaded it up with ads like a million other commercial ventures on the 'net.

One thing is certain.  If we use the same old centralized control model we will end up the same way as sites that use it now; unresponsive to the members who build and contribute. We can succeed or fail either way.  The method of govenance will change the basic relationship between the community and the site owner.  If it succeeds then additional sites will adopt the model and change the way things are done.  If we fail then it will be time to find another model that brings about changes that benefit experts who volunteer their time helping others on the Internet.

Playing safe by doing what everyone else is doing has never had much appeal for me.

[VGR]

I understand, but wanting to e "all different" from other sites is perhaps not an obligation nor a necessary condition for success.

ERT is different enough to appear original and may very well succeed (I see it as succeeding already) even if it's run like the other sites. I see no contradiction.

[Esopo]

VGR,

I see what you are saying and I don't necessarily disagree with it, but I feel an interim council of 4 people should do perfectly fine, especially right now since the people that will make the first council are bound to be some of the "founding fathers" who largely share the same views, or at least, the passionate will to make this thing work.

Further, I don't think that ERT is being different for the sake of being so, but because the goals we are pushing towards are very unique. I'm sure if something stops working at some points will be able to revise it. There is always the option of a site-admin revolt to reset the government  :wink: