So, this thread/poll is for people to express their opinions on how the election went.

I do NOT want to hear any complaints about who won or lost. What I am looking for are suggestions on how to improve the process. Specifically the following:

1. How candidates are chose.
2. The "selling yourself" stage.
3. The voting process itself.




I already have some ideas on how to improve things but I want to hear what other people think about how it went and some possible improvements.

I overall think the process went well for a first run. I think it could have been better but I was happy with it.

I naturally liked the way it was run. (But I hated the winner)

I liked how the candidates were chosen, but I think a field of 10 max should be the starting ballet. I think there should be a short application to choose the best 10 users for the ballet.

I liked the selling yourself, and it's a great way for you to gain support by talking about actual issues, and not attacking others. I do think that having anonymous accounts would be cool so users can't chose because of favoritism. (Naturally those users friends would know which person was which account, and staff would know because IP, but random users wouldn't)

Voting was good, I don't think it should be done through PM as that would be so much stress on the candidates. I just think the fact that you have to post or communicate with you or another admin should be clear for people who are just going to click the name and not actually read it.

But it was a pretty dang good first run.

It did went well. There was a huge participation, with nearly 75% of votes claimed, and for a first time is a great success, even more if we consider it was a two round election.

I don't think it was perfect, but at the same time I ignore how we could make it better. The biggest flaw is people voting and not stating they did so in the thread, which takes away a bit of credibility to the results. Maybe we could also add PMing certain people, like the current locals or even you since you're our manager, and when the voting is nearing its end we could rack up if we have people stating this way that they voted.

I personally prefer an app based format. I think it's a decent idea having candidates try to "sell themselves" but I feel like a lot of users simply vote without actually putting much thought in it or checking the threads, and that it does somewhat default into a popularity contest. I would personally trust the globals+ to have good judgement and know who would have the qualities needed of a moderator due to their experience and I feel like it would be a lot less work than having an election as well not to mention the election threads wont clog up your forum. I would question if an election based format is something most people want as well but I suppose we'll see with the poll.

If this is a format that is going to be kept even though I'd prefer it isn't, I think voting should be handled through PM as that will instantly confirm the votes in stead of having to reply to the thread and you wont have to call the election like you did now.

I don't think that we should do anymore elections like this. I'm against it, but I'm not going to go on as to why I'm against it, because it'll just start a load of drama.

Barathemos : yeah, I think limiting the field to 10 max would be smart. I also think having more requirements to participate (like already hitting the 90 post per month quota) or being a "trusted" member (or whatever that eventually becomes if it gets changed) would also help.

While I think it would be nice to have anonymous accounts like you said they wouldn't remain that way for long so wouldn't really serve the purpose they are supposed to. I think that if more people asked questions (or were required to ask a question in order to vote) that people would have more chances to convince people to vote for them.

I think the voting should either be all in the thread or all via PM. And if it were via PM then we could at least verify who is doing the voting and prevent possible cheating like happened this time. Only 75% of the votes were claimed. That really bothers me. Also, it would force people to do some more thinking and not just voting for whoever they recognize.

EX Palen : see my above comment about voting. I would want it 1 way or the other. While we wouldn't do this there isn't much stopping me and Jordan from saying we got x number of votes for a certain candidate and giving them the win.

Zlinqx : that's fair. While I agree that the global+ staff are good at picking mods we've also picked a lot of duds over the years. I agree about the voting through PM's though. Having votes go to the global mod inbox would be best. Then there would be 4 people viewing and counting up the votes. I'd prefer something like that if we did it again.

gamerforlifeforever2 : fair enough. Not everyone is going to like the process.

geeogree : Of course there have been a few exceptions, I don't think their judgement is infallible but generally because they have experience with this and I assume most of the time have modded themselves I would still trust them to know best. As for the voting process I was for doing it through PMs since before the election started.

I was honestly surprised it wasn't handled that way, but yeah I feel like that would alleviate a lot of the issues that were had, I would also suggest having set dates for when the voting period ends since I know some users were confused about that, and might've cast their votes early because they weren't sure when it would be too late.

Zlinqx : it was done via a poll in order to be transparent. However, it was clear that the poll method is flawed because there is no way to verify where the votes were coming from. If there is another election it will be done via PM rather than through a poll.

I thought that it went fair enough for a first time trial situation, although I probably would say that I personally prefer the application process a little better.

Still though, I would be willing to do it again next time an opening is up, just with a few tweaks or additions. Mainly having the votes be via PM or (some other way aside from Polls to make sure the process is more fair)

No one's ever going to agree on the best way to go about this process, but at least the users were able to be involved and see that the process of choosing a mod is not the easiest thing in the world to do and hopefully it gains them some insight into the process.

It was based too much on popularity and the users that wanted this so badly didn't even participate at all in asking questions or making comments.

I would rather use the application process.

I thought it was great.

I love the idea of anonymity, but it was abused by people not claiming their votes. I also didn't like that we could see how many votes each user had as it honestly sways people's choices. Say for example Erirnn has fifteen votes, Zlinqx has fourteen, and EX Palen has eight. EX Palen had ten more people that wanted to vote for him, but they see that Eirinn is leading and while they want EX Palen to win, they want just as badly for Eirinn NOT to win, so they vote Zlinqx since there's a better chance of Eirinn losing that way.

So my suggestions would be:
1. Keep the poll, but host it off site in a way that conceals totals until after it's final.
1B. If my first suggestion isn't something we're willing to do, then keep Vizzed polls, but eliminate anonymity (though I appreciated it this time) so as to eliminate "phantom votes". If someone does not post to say who they voted for, their vote is not valid. All unclaimed votes are then scrapped.

I think voting through PM would completely destroy the purpose of the elections, as we made the polls to let people feel like users have a fair chance to be made Locals and to eliminate suspicion of favoritism by Globals and Admims when selecting. And as you pointed out, even though anyone with any sense knows that you and Jordan wouldn't rig the election, the process of hidden voting by the "higher ups" will remove the transparency of the process and make it all seem shady to the conspiracy theorists that we always hear from after normal mod selection processes.

That's my two cents.

After a bit of thinking, I think it's pretty probable it was more a fact of popularity rather than actually going through the campaign threads to determine the best choice. I'm saying it's probable because I don't deem the top 3 who made it to the second round the most popular users in the whole ballot.

I honestly believe these elections should only be suited for situations when we need very few replacements, like it was this time, if they were to be used at all. I don't see any good coming from these elections if we had to pick like three or four new mods.

Probably the best thing would be for both systems to coexist and use them depending on the situation we're facing.

I honestly like the idea of voting through PM. Users could send a PM to the global mod's inbox stating their vote (they don't have to say why they voted for that user). That way, it'll be very easy to know if there are illegitimate votes. (For example, it's easy to see if there are re-regs made just to vote for a user.)

I know it's more effort for the voters, which could lead to having less votes. However, the voters shouldn't be lazy anyways since they should read all the candidates' local mod threads before voting. I'd rather have slightly less votes that are 95% legitimate than more votes that are only 70% legitimate. 

Even though some may think that the globals might "favor" certain users over others, all they really have to do is just tally up the votes and check for fake votes (like re-regs). So there is technically no way for global+ to be biased. (Unless they lie about the amount of votes, but they are obviously trustworthy enough to NOT do that) 

Just my opinion, I guess.

I first like the idea on paper, but it didn't really go like the way we hoped for.

It was a good thing that we test the whole thing out, but like Vane said, it was mostly bias of popularly and them wanting it really bad.

To my opinion, I think it's better to do things the traditional way rather than the whole voting thing, let the Globals+ discuss about who they think should be mod.

Personally, I liked the way it was done, but also agree with ex palen's statement about using it for certain situations. I didn't know any of the candidates that well, so I actually took the time to read through the threads, but also can see a lot of users not doing this because of how time consuming it turned out to be. The way this is done will never be perfect, so in the end, I trust the staff's decision to do what they will from here, and hope for the best.

I think the idea of voting through PM might just work, and work well.  While it might take more time to process, there is little room for disputation in an election held that way.  I think it went mostly well, actually, but I feel there's room for improvement.  For example, it seemed that Singelli was going to be the clear winner, then the votes swayed Bara's way.  I feel like things could have been done better.  Anyhoo, I feel Bara will be great as a mod.  Congrats, Bara!

1. Candidate choosing can be the same sorta till the start of the public reveal.
2. There was a post I saw in one of the threads that showed people as being as anonymous candidates to try and eliminate biased/popularity votes.
3. After voting is done say if there was an even larger number say 25 take votes and reduce to them something like 10 or less and then let locals+ handle the choosing on who they think is best for the job. Before it gets sent there I think everyone should know who the users are that went to the next round.

I thought it was a pretty interesting idea on paper, getting an election going for the appropriate time of year. But it seems that in the end, it wasn't a very good idea to have a popularity contest to decide the winner. I just really liked the idea of doing an application, and all the site staff and/or mods+ get together and get a discussion going on who should get it and why, y'know? I just like the old stuff better.

It sounded good as an idea, but I think that the application system worked much better than the election. Therefore, I think we should revert to that system.

For one, this election seemed much more like a popularity contest than an actual election. Not to hate on any of the candidates, but the final three were arguably the most popular, well-known people out of the initial list. I mean, Singelli recently came back to the site not too long ago and she immediately got votes. While her campaign thread was good, you've got to admit there was more to it. Some of the rejected candidates from the first round could have easily turned out to be Grade-A mods.

Stemming off of the first idea, these candidates are doing what candidates should do: Campaigning and making themselves seem like the right choice. However, like real life politicians, some of the things they say are just for glamour and to be, for lack of better words, spitting out what the people want. Globals don't need to read those threads (and thus be persuaded) by the candidates; all they really have to do is monitor how they act on the site regularly. It sounds like a hassle, but it makes the mods more genuine. During election season, they're bound to be nicer and friendlier for that win.

It may just be me, but from what I can tell, it isn't. I'm still fine with elections if the issues are all resolved, but until then, applications were just fine.

You know, I'm usually not one to be confrontational or cause a fuss, but I can't keep quiet on this matter any longer.

I'm a little frustrated with people bringing up 'popularity' in this discussion.  Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe.... just maybe.... the three people who ended up on top were NOT voted in because of their popularity?  I mean.... Barathemos has made quite a few enemies in the past and I'm sure he still has many.  I myself have a NUMBER of people that do not like me or what I stand for.  And Tyri?  Well, most of his friends left the site long, long ago.  If we look at the numbers of unclaimed votes and the names of those who admitted to voting in the first round, MANY of them were newbies and people who had no way to know the candidates on a very personal level.

I'm sure that... yes... SOME votes were cast based off prior relationships with the candidates, but I think it is a disgrace to say anything more than that.  None of you can -possibly- know the reason of every vote out there.

And let's just say that the top three candidates WERE the most popular people on the list.  Has it occurred to anyone that maybe they are popular for a reason?  That popularity CAN be synonymous with those who are right for the job?  Why does someone have to be LESS popular to be elected or to be good at the job?

I'm sure Barathemose got elected because he is BEST for the job in the sight of vizzed users.... regardless of his perceived popularity or not. To say anything otherwise is a huge slap in the face to him and anyone that put their faith in him enough to vote for him.

I wasn't even fond of the voting process, and I DO prefer the application process.  But vizzed users complain about not having a voice, and then complain when they are given one.  Sure, it wasn't perfect, but it was a first try.  There were bound to be TONS of glitches in the system.
(And I know this feedback is not all going to be positive, and that the bad points DO need to be brought up. To all the people offering constructive criticism, thank you!  A few posts here seem to be subtle complaints, though, and I HAVE seen many actual complaints in several places.)

geeogree specifically mentioned in the original post, that he basically did not want to see candidates' names tossed around, but I see a lot of that going on in this thread.  (And mentioning the 'top three' is the same thing as mentioning them by name, really. It's not like there are any other top three candidates.)

Oats :
I didn't see anybody act any friendlier than they normally do.  I think every one of the 13 candidates answered questions genuinely and without deceitful intentions. It's not like any of them said "Ooooh, if you vote for me, everyone will gain 2 trust points!"  Now THAT sounds like a politician's promise.