h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I think an activity and time based maybe.

We're never going to have a system that no one can cheat, even if we demand a photocopy of everyone's driving license someone could get a fake.

What we need is one where cheating it a lot of hassle and where we can pick up signs of a potential problem.

So at least 6 posts in the last 6 weeks prior to the announcement of an election? Obviously only one e mail per vote. If more than one vote comes from the same IP account we can take a look at the posts and see if they come from different people. It would be really obvious if they were people who lived at the same address.

Of course it wouldn't get away from someone who had access to more than one computer and more than one ea mail addy.

I don't think six posts is enough. Someone earlier in the thread had some ideas, either at least one edited entry or a volunteership or a post article or, well I forget the rest.

To be honest you wouldn't need the time element then.

It seems a bit stringent, but we are talking about voting for important positions here. If we staggered the elections, too, (say electing two editors every three? six? motnhs, a) we would avoid having a huge upheaval once a year (or whatever time period editors serve for) and it would give any newbies time to qualify without making them wait too long before they get to have their say in this matter.

We want to be inclusive, of course we do, but in a way, giving people an incentive for getting involved - increased 'rights' on the site - could be a good thing in and of itself.

I'm really uncomfortable about having to earn the right to vote, I'm ok with the idea that you have to have been a member for a period of time say 6 weeks pre election announcement.

We are trying to be inclusive, recognise that everyone is equally as important and we all have different ways of engaging with the community, these are important core community values. But we'll throw all those out when it comes to our democratic processes.

One member, one vote is the only principled way to run elections, according to community values and the ideals that underpin democracy.


Love Peanut

What's a "member"?

Someone who has joined the site ( 6 weeks before the election annocement) and maybe who has registered to vote on the h2g2 electoral role (sp?)

That's crisp enough. I disagree with you, but it's a crisp definition.

It's worth remembering tht there are age, nationality and residence requirements for real life elections. My German friend Ulrike can vote here in European elections but not UK ones, for example, even though she's lived here almost 30 years.

B

I'm thinking now 12 weeks residence that and getting yourself on the electoral roll is requirement enough

I don't think there's anything bad in earning your right to vote. Of course the requirements should not be too hight but also for new members it can be quite positive I think.It shows that we take things serious, that we want to keep a standard. And for some eager newbies maybe it's even a goal 'I will write my first Entry for the EG so I can vote' something like that.
I never thought it's bad to reward people for participating. And to a certain degree it keeps people from voting randomly I think. It makes the whole voting seem more important so more people hopefully really think before they push a button.

What dimensions could there be...?

Duration of membership - how long ago you joined the site
Activity in the forums - number of posts? number of words posted?
Contribution to the Guide - Number of entries? Number of edited entries?

Perhaps a points system? You can earn points by any of the above, so someone who's been a member for a while gets a vote but contributing by writing also earns you points so you can vote sooner?

Ben

What about nominations?

If you are nominated by another two members who both vouch that you are not someone's sock puppet then you get a vote?

Well, Greensleeves and a girl called Ben both nominate me.

Can we have a smiley?

Duration of membership: yes but only in combination with the other two, I think. Somebody who has been registered for 7 years but never contributed anything should be treated like a newbie, I guess.

I think it should be edited Entries, but the number could be as low as 1 or 2. Additionally maybe also Entries in PR that will be edited soon could count.

Activity in the forums definitely, especially for people who don't have time to write an Entry. I just hope it's not too difficult to find out about that. Can a computer do it?


... possibly yes, Z, if these other two fulfill the requirements themselves.

I am pretty sure that any social networking system worthy of the name could count the number of posts a poster's posted, Tav. Let's assume we can do that.

Ben

Ok, good.

Ok, here's my suggestions.

You have to accumualate 42 points to be able to vote in an election. You only need to do this once to be entitled to vote in every election therafter.

Points can be accumulated as follows:

1 per week since you signed up
3 per conversation you have posted in (removed posts do not count)
14 per entry in Peer Review
42 per published entry - ie per entry published in the Edited Guide, the UnderGuide or the Post

Points can be accumulated in any of the above ways, so someone who has been on the site for 7 weeks (7 points) and put an entry into PR (14 points) and joined in 7 conversations (21 points) has the requisite 42 points. But equally, someone who signed up a year ago has also got the requisie 42 points even if they've not posted in any conversations or put anything into PR.

Ben

Not sure about the signed up but never did anything. Maybe there should be a maximum number of points being given for that.
Like if we give only 21 points max for time people would have to eg contribute to 7 conversations, which should be possible within the 21 weeks that give you the 21 points. (that's about 5 months)

Also the 14 points for an Entry in PR should of course not be given for stuff that is removed from there again.

... and there should also be points for stuff that is in and being active in a volunteer group.
Maybe an entry or comic or something like that in the Post could also give 14 points or even 21.
Not sure how many points there should be for active contribution to a volunteer group.

I think if someone is active in a volunteer group, they'll have joined in more than 14 conversations and got their points that way.

I thought publication in the post should be equal to publication in the EG.

>> 42 per published entry - ie per entry published in the Edited Guide, the UnderGuide or the Post

That said, it should perhaps be 42 points per solo entry in the EG, UG or Post but 14 for a joint entry. That way, three joint entries is the equivalent of one solo entry.

Ben

Are we at risk of overcomplicating things.

I do think that Peanut has a point as well?