[Member] Perpetual Nomination Thread

[CmdrWilkens]

As the Updated Sentate ruleset has passed nomination duties have fallen to the House of Commons. Within that context please utilize this thread to nominate or second any board member you feel should be considered for Senate membership.

Nominations will close on the 24th of each month (21st in Feb) so for December the window is short but all subsequent months will have the full period (2nd-24th) available for nominations from the HoC.

Remember this thread is for nominating members to the Senate or seconding the motion, extraneous comment is discouraged.

[Master of Cards]

I was thinking about future Senators today and one name came to my head on who would make an excellent Senator.

Schuyler Colfax has shown repeatly that he would make an excellent Senator.

[Flagg]

I was thinking about future Senators today and one name came to my head on who would make an excellent Senator.

Schuyler Colfax has shown repeatly that he would make an excellent Senator.

I nominate Stark. He's an active participant in many areas of the board and always has something interesting to add.

[Starglider]

I nominate Stark. He's an active participant in many areas of the board and always has something interesting to add.

I second Stark, we should definitely send him in as our crack drama-defusing agent. Licensed to use unlimited sarcasm, he has the best training Testing can provide in puncturing egos and administering reality checks. However should he be captured by the forces of Zeon and revealed as a double agent, we will have to deny any knowlege of him or his mission.

[Mr Bean]

Thread stuck, one carp fine assigned

[Coiler]

While I detest Stark's personality, his intelligence and contribution to the board are undeniable. I third him.

[ray245]

I will nominate Samuel.

He is objective in my opinion, and able to use logical reasoning to justify his stance. We need more obejective and calm members in the senate.

[CmdrWilkens]

1) Stark hs been nominated and seconded


2) I would remind everyone that if you don't provide some actual LINKS (say to the person's profile or paticualr posts) then while your choice of candidate may get a nomination it would be pretty hard to vote for elevation with no evidence.

[Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba]

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 4&t=129901

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 4&t=129514

Here are examples of Stark preventing the GNC forum from being entirely useless and un-entertaining.

Most examples of his drama-destruction are in Testing, and thus all records of his mockery of the Senate have been destroyed.

I submit that he must become part of the Senate as a sort of 'SDN Republican' - he'll destroy the government from the inside!

[Starglider]

2) I would remind everyone that if you don't provide some actual LINKS (say to the person's profile or paticualr posts) then while your choice of candidate may get a nomination it would be pretty hard to vote for elevation with no evidence.

This is a sensible argument for people who only post rarely. However Stark has over 17,000 posts, not including testing of course. I looked at the list of 'board members by post count' and he's 16th, out of 3000+. That said he does seem to makes many, many two-sentence posts and very few long ones. That makes it hard to remember any neat essays to scrutinise, but really I can't see how you could be paying any attention to this board and not have already read plenty of his output. Of course only about 30% of it is serious (average by mass, contents may vary), but when he is serious he tends to be fairly insightful.

I submit that he must become part of the Senate as a sort of 'SDN Republican'

Congratulations, you broke my irony meter.

[Coyote]

Stark is certainly worthy of being the 'official iconoclast' of the SDN Olympics.

[CmdrWilkens]

Stark has been nominated and seconded for December, there are a few other nominations but no other seconds. Everyone has until the end of the 24th to nominate and second.

[The Romulan Republic]

I will nominate Samuel.

He is objective in my opinion, and able to use logical reasoning to justify his stance. We need more obejective and calm members in the senate.

An interesting choice. I did a quick search using the members list (always stay informed about politics, especially when considering weather to second a nomination), and a few things stuck out to me.

First, he's very new (joined around when I did I think), and I have little doubt he'd be the "youngest" member of the Senate. A kind of "Junior Senator for SD.net" Note that this is not nessissarily a detriment, since it means that he won't have had time yet to make a lot of enemies and could be a fresh voice (this is potentially off-set by my third point). Also, it would be a handy rebuttal to the "Senate=old boy's club" accusations.

Secondly, he has a very high post count for someone who hasn't been around for very long. This shows a high level of participation and availabillity, which can only be a good thing when the Senate is trying to reach a decission quickly. Furthermore, it means that despite being new, he will be familliar with the board.

However, he also seems to be a bit too much of a "yes man" when it comes to the board culture. Let me explain. While I haven't followed his posting history paricularily closely, my impression has been of someone who doesn't stray too much beyond the typical board culture, and has yet to devellope a real identitity, voice, or reptutation here. While this can be an asset for reasons explained above, it is also a detriment.

I have seriously considered seconding this nomination. However, I had misgivings, and I don't really know the poster in question. So I thought I'd see what others thought, ie, am I reading this right or am I completely off the mark? Right now I'm thinking that Samuel might make a Senator one day, but now's probably too soon to nominate him.

[CmdrWilkens]

Final note, I'm going to bed, Dec 24th is over everywhere in another few hours but if there are any new nominations or seconds before I wake up they will be inclued in the vote thread.

[Mr. Coffee]

I'd like to nominate Colefax for the senate, just because the kid has changed so much and he deserves a good break, eh.

[Keevan_Colton]

I'd like to nominate Colefax for the senate, just because the kid has changed so much and he deserves a good break, eh.

I second this.

[Hotfoot]

Yeah, that's not going to get anywhere near the Senate if I have anything to say about it.

[CmdrWilkens]

Colefax has been nominated and seconded.

Nominations will remain open until the 24th of January if there are any others folks wish to nominate.

[Enigma]

I nominate chitoryu12. Second choice would be Shroom.

[Coyote]

Rationales? Links to evidence of greatness in the field?

[Darth Fanboy]

I'll second the nomination for Shroom Man, because I think he will represent a portion of the board currently not represented in the Senate. He's eccentric, but generally a more productive poster than you might think if all you read is his testing posts.

[Hotfoot]

It should be noted that Testing is not a good field for post submissions because they are auto-deleted. Nominations should have a good few threads along with each nomination as a support for the argument that the individual deserves to be in the Senate.

[ray245]

I'll second the nomination for Shroom Man, because I think he will represent a portion of the board currently not represented in the Senate. He's eccentric, but generally a more productive poster than you might think if all you read is his testing posts.

Third.

He is rather rational in his arguments when it is about a serious topic. Moreover, he is one of the few members that can remain cheerful most of the time. Which is a good quality for a senator, given that Senators should not be prone to anger when they are debating.

His arguments in other areas, from SLAM to N&P is sound most of the time, which means he might be a good person in regards to policy making issues.

Examples: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... lear+power

[Shroom Man 777]

Yeah, but you'll never catch me in a SRS BSNSS debate with facts and equations and proofs thrown around. It'll be a cold day in hell when I can stand toe to toe in a Coliseum-style debate against any of those... brained people. But if it happens, that will mean I am smarterers and have things like... knowledge!

Haha, Shroomy in the Senate. Ray, you have funny ideas.

Besides, nomination's over. STRAK is now a Super Special SDN Senator of Snarkcastic Speakingness.

(I'd make a better Senator than Socks though )

(Like, I wouldn't've approved the House of Commons and stuff )

It should be noted that Testing is not a good field for post submissions because they are auto-deleted. Nominations should have a good few threads along with each nomination as a support for the argument that the individual deserves to be in the Senate.

Yeah, the guy is saying that I'm cooler than all those Testing posts make me out to be. That if only my Testing posts are taken into account, then I should've been banned a long time ago with the SDN administration dispatching Ford Prefect to kill me in my sleep just to be sure. Ford has said that he would love don a Schutzstaffel uniform to oppress the shit out of me.

If we're still nominating, I think FROD (Ford Prefect) would be a good choice. He's a cool cat. If a bit of a pretentious drok.

But since STRAK is in, I think we've filled our quota for Aussies. Or else it'll be like Hollywood getting saturated with Hugh Jackman, Nicole Kidman, Russel Crowe and anti-Jew warrior Mel Gibson. If there'll ever be a Senate videoconference, the accents will be totally unbearable.

[Enigma]

Rationales? Links to evidence of greatness in the field?

Does Colefax have any? No? But his nomination has been accepted. Why not Shroomy?