At 5/1/10 06:08 PM, NEVR wrote:
At 5/1/10 05:38 PM, Bahamut wrote:
Fair enough, it just seems that we're almost exhausting the number of really good candidates available to us by letting in three at a time. I don't want it to get to a point where we're voting new people on purely for the sake of voting new people on, y'know?
At 5/1/10 05:32 PM, NEVR wrote:
Is it customary these days to allow three at a time, every time?This is gfox's request and I have to respect that. However, if he's got time to say a few things otherwise, he's free to do so and I'll lower the number of new members to enter if he feels that way now.
I'd personally be in favour of just one new member being voted in.
First off, scroll up and read the shit from December 09 and January 10 above. I was just half-bitching (for bitching's sake) that Bahamut inducted new members last year in December and didn't wait till 20100101 (that's how I think of dates, because computers order files correctly if you use that notation, YYYYMMDD, longest to shortest, which I WISH was the worldwide standard, but noooooo, America has to be all MMDDYYYY and the UK/parts of Europe/wherever has to be all DDMMYYYY and shit, like a buncha fools.... </date format rant>)...
ANYWAY, point being, I was mostly being silly for no real reason, just to say that I thought having a membership induction date of 20100101 would be fucking BITCHING, and that if I were a new member, I'd rather be in on 20100101 than on 20091231 (indeed, I finally signed up to the Escapist, a site that I was considering joining for 2-3 years now, if only because I enjoy the occasional Zero Punctuation video game review or an article here and there, even if I'm not going to be social on the site like I am (was?) here on N)... whatever... I signed up there on 20100101 because I thought that was a cool fucking date, yanno?).
BUT, I mostly had my tongue in cheek.
I told Bahamut (again, half-jokingly) that to make it up to me that he'd just brought in new members with December 2009 Wi/Ht? membership dates instead of January 2010 ones, like I would have had I been running the election (which my lazy arse just can't bring itself to do these days), then he could make it up to me by making sure to do another election soon.
I couldn't think of any ol' arbitrary date except that I was getting married on 20100514, and Bahamut had been talking to me on Steam about how he was gonna tell Tom Fulp to announce that "former mod gfoxcook got married today" or whatever, and I was all "fuck no, man!" to that... so I said "hey, just do the election before I get married, and also, you went from 44 members to 47 members last time, and ugh... 47... barely better than 37, amiright?
So... one thing led to another and I convinced Bahamut to make it up to me by holding an election in May 2010 and inducting 3 members so that we'd be at a nice even 50 to make me happy with my insane round-number fetishes. #;-}>
It was mostly for a laugh, in short.
But Bahamut clearly meant it when he agreed to it, or he wouldn't have sent out voting reminders saying "hey, it's May 2010, we're going up from 47 to 50 members, gfox said to do this, BLAME HIM NOW ME, DAMN YOU ALL!, and here, please vote... oh, and also, if you want to bitch about this to me (even though you should bitch at gfox, not me, but let's face it... gfox is a lazy bastard and isn't around much anymore, so you'll have to bitch at me then, eh?)... then go for it instead of voting, you blighters!"
Which, BTW, I just saw today, because I've been busy planning my wedding and other IRL crap.
the 3 members was just to make me happy with 50 total members, historically.
The next 10 elections could have 1 member each.
Last election, when we went from 44 to 47, I'd rather have gone to only 45 or 46... you know me and numbers. I don't care whether the candidate pool is too large or too small, I only care about the numbers. That's why it's better for Bahamut to run the elections now, and both I and Recon (who had been doing them at spancker's request for years) agreed he could, so why the fuck not, eh?
Anyway, my point being, I didn't insist on 3 for 3's sake, I just wanted us to have a nice even 50 members. But I just told Bahamut on Steam that he can do 1 election, 2 elections, or 3 elections to get there. i.e. if he wants to do one now, one later this year, and one in 2011, just as long as we have a nice even 50 (a half-century mark, by god!), I'll be happy.
My fear, of course, is that he was planning on going from 47 to 49 to 51 to 53 and have nothing but ugly odd number memberships or some shit. Irrational? Of course. When have I ever claimed to be anything BUT? I am what I am. #;-}>
And yet you people still tolerate me, seem to want me to come back and post, and all that shit. And I humour you. So eh, if you want to humour me back by electing 3 people (now... or later on, whenever), to say "Happy Wedding Day!" with 50 members for ol' gfox, that's fine by me. SO EXPLOITABLE. #;-}>
But if not, that's fine, too.
Okay, I was just on the phone with my mom for 30 minutes, so I've completely lost my train of thought. I should probably just scrap this entire post, but you all seem to be worried that since Bahamut elected 3 people last time, and since he's planned (because of me) to do 3 more THIS time, that all 2010, 2011, 2012, etc. etc. long, we'll be doing constant 3-person elections.
And I just wanted to say... NEIN.
This is a one-time (for me, at least) 3 person request, simply because if we add 3 people, we'll be at 50!
Now, this is how I put it to Bahamut on Steam an hour ago:
17:12 - gfox: IOW, they had no problem with the election, just thought 3 was too many?
17:12 - gfox: I guess this is my point:
17:12 - gfox: let the election period finish up.
17:12 - gfox: See how many people voted.
17:12 - gfox: See how many people they voted for, see how things add up.
17:12 - Dugdemo: Yeah
17:12 - gfox: If the votes go 8 7 6 2 2 1
17:13 - gfox: then I'd argue the 8, 7, and 6 deserve to be members.
17:13 - gfox: And I can get my way and we have 50 members.
17:13 - gfox: But if it's like 5 1 1 1 11
17:13 - gfox: then just do the one that got 5.
17:13 - gfox: Know what I mean? See if there's real consensus for more than 1 person, maybe 2 or 3.
17:13 - gfox: 3 at most for a nice even 50.
17:13 - gfox: But if not, then 49 or 48.
17:13 - gfox: But my point is simply that you need not worry about it now.
17:13 - gfox: See how it goes by your deadline of may 10th.
BOOM. Click. Done!
VOTE, PEOPLE. VOTE NOWWWWW OR FOREVER HOLD YER PENII.