StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Occasionally, I see a recurrent discussion where users complain that the House of Commons has no real power, and that even the Senate has limited power, whereupon others answer that "this is Mike's board, Mike's rules" and users respond that this entire exercise is pointless if the board is a dictatorship. With that in mind, I think it is necessary to post a reminder of how these forums came to be, and why they exist.

Early in the board's history, it was discovered that one of the most common troll tactics is to whine about the board's rules, particularly since our rules are different from most forum rules. It became common enough to become a serious nuisance (especially when thread after thread became hijacked into arguments about the rules), so we added a new rule: you can't whine about the rules.

This was useful for shutting down certain troll tactics, but we eventually realized that people should be able to express concerns and suggestions about board policy, features, etc. So we created a class of users who could do precisely that: the Senators. We selected them for maturity and posting history, gave them special privileges, allowed them to discuss board policy in a dedicated forum, and allowed them to vote on certain issues, such as disciplinary actions. Some felt that the entire membership should have a similar forum, hence the House of Commons was born. However, it was never meant to be a voting body with any kind of authority to force me or the administrative staff or even the Senate to do anything; it is simply a feedback forum for issues that you are not allowed to discuss on the rest of the forum for the reasons described in the previous paragraph.

One final note: I do 100% of the server maintenance and while Google ad money helps defray the Internet connection costs, I still pay for the server, I still do all of the software maintenance, and I still pay for all repairs, upgrades, etc. Only a small number of you have ever donated money to help (I do keep records of those who have donated, although I haven't made a public list). Those of you who complain the most are also least likely to be on the donator list; don't think I haven't noticed. That is why I reserve ultimate executive authority for myself, although I will tend to give consideration to donators. Those of you who have experience paying bills in life understand and accept this without protest. Those of you who are too young to have ever supported yourself or paid any bills may feel that this is unreasonable; all I can say is that when your name is on the bills someday, you will understand.

So if you ever tire of running the board, are we going to turn it over to a plutocracy

Out of curiosity, what rules have been the problem? All I can remember is Israel v Palestine memorandum and Shep upset he won the vote but didn't get the post.

Samuel wrote:So if you ever tire of running the board, are we going to turn it over to a plutocracy

No, clearly it is libertarianism, where one should buy shares in the service provided!

Out of curiosity, what rules have been the problem? All I can remember is Israel v Palestine memorandum and Shep upset he won the vote but didn't get the post.

I thought at the time I'd made it clear that the votes were "advisory" in nature; a way to take the pulse of the public and let the Admins see if their own, personal picks squared with the feelings of the people.

For the record, I have donated $100 to the paypal account. That said, I don't think that I have complained all that much about the rules if at all, despite perceptions and who I get lumped in with. I will however, argue about implementation and interpretation of the rules for certain.

That also said, anyone who doesn't understand what the Senate, and now the House of Commons is for, just hasn't been reading and paying attention.

Coyote wrote:

Shep upset he won the vote but didn't get the post.

I thought at the time I'd made it clear that the votes were "advisory" in nature; a way to take the pulse of the public and let the Admins see if their own, personal picks squared with the feelings of the people.

You did. Again, it comes down to people not reading and not paying attention.

Darth Wong wrote: Only a small number of you have ever donated money to help (I do keep records of those who have donated, although I haven't made a public list). Those of you who complain the most are also least likely to be on the donator list; don't think I haven't noticed.

Shit. I assumed this was what the Hall Of Heroes was. Now I have to keep investigating.

Coyote wrote: I thought at the time I'd made it clear that the votes were "advisory" in nature; a way to take the pulse of the public and let the Admins see if their own, personal picks squared with the feelings of the people.

Yeah, this is probably the strangest misunderstanding and it's a shame that people felt this way.

But now I feel kinda guilty for never donating; I've never set up paypal etc. I should wire Hav some dollars to remedy this; it's absurd that I'd pay $15 a month for something terrible like EVE and not ever pay anything for SDN.