ajqtrz
Chef - loquacious Old Dog
If you've been following things lately we've been given a bunch of opportunities to vote on various proposals. Which, in my mind is a good thing. However, I've noticed four things about the voting.
1) It some times comes after a little as a week of discussion.
2) The original post may not be, once the discussion is had, what the original poster is thinking in part or in detail at the end of the discussion.
3) It's usually "up or down" -- meaning it's an all or nothing vote.
4) Once the poll is posted you aren't allowed to suggest changes. (I know, because I did and "oops, shouldn't have done that.")
On the first point I do wonder if 7 days is enough. While there are a number of posters, like myself, who are pretty consistent (at least I have been lately), there are others who come only once every week or two. Thus, asking for a poll too quickly may not be getting as wide a set of opinions as you could. I would suggest 14 days or 3 days since the last comment was made or things are getting repetitious -- whichever is longer but with a maximum of some kind.
Along with that it is a great thing to vote, but if you are voting on the original post you may not be voting on what the original poster wants after the discussion. A discussion is about modifying others beliefs and having our own modified so that, one hopes, the best beliefs come to the surface. I would suggest that if we are voting on the original post we don't need the discussion because we can't really incorporate any changes that discussion has made in the mind or the original poster or anybody else. I would suggest that, before the poll is posted, the original poster is allowed to redo the original post with changes he/she wishes (or none if there are none), or design the poll so that the various aspects are voted on...see the next paragraph.
The use of the "up or down" vote leaves voters in the awkward position of rejecting the original idea if there is even one thing in it they do not like or accepting the whole thing even if it has things they don't like. Perhaps the original post should be polled as to the aspects of it, rather than completely up or down. For instance, I may, in my original post, say I'd like a building with 12 slots in it for automatically storing building while I move them. Call it a Building Warehouse. I may say it should be 6x6, cost X diamonds, need to be fed, etc... etc.... If the voter reacts to the "12 slots" with "whoa, that's way too many," he or she may vote down the idea of a "Building Warehouse" even though they love the idea. Breaking down the question to the basic idea and the various aspects of what you like/dislike would be a better poll and garner a lot more information.
Once the poll is posted you don't have the ability to suggest changes. This is an okay rule, but probably unnecessary. If you include the "final form" of the original post in the poll people would know what they were voting on even if the discussion was long and complex.
Just some more ideas.
AJ
1) It some times comes after a little as a week of discussion.
2) The original post may not be, once the discussion is had, what the original poster is thinking in part or in detail at the end of the discussion.
3) It's usually "up or down" -- meaning it's an all or nothing vote.
4) Once the poll is posted you aren't allowed to suggest changes. (I know, because I did and "oops, shouldn't have done that.")
On the first point I do wonder if 7 days is enough. While there are a number of posters, like myself, who are pretty consistent (at least I have been lately), there are others who come only once every week or two. Thus, asking for a poll too quickly may not be getting as wide a set of opinions as you could. I would suggest 14 days or 3 days since the last comment was made or things are getting repetitious -- whichever is longer but with a maximum of some kind.
Along with that it is a great thing to vote, but if you are voting on the original post you may not be voting on what the original poster wants after the discussion. A discussion is about modifying others beliefs and having our own modified so that, one hopes, the best beliefs come to the surface. I would suggest that if we are voting on the original post we don't need the discussion because we can't really incorporate any changes that discussion has made in the mind or the original poster or anybody else. I would suggest that, before the poll is posted, the original poster is allowed to redo the original post with changes he/she wishes (or none if there are none), or design the poll so that the various aspects are voted on...see the next paragraph.
The use of the "up or down" vote leaves voters in the awkward position of rejecting the original idea if there is even one thing in it they do not like or accepting the whole thing even if it has things they don't like. Perhaps the original post should be polled as to the aspects of it, rather than completely up or down. For instance, I may, in my original post, say I'd like a building with 12 slots in it for automatically storing building while I move them. Call it a Building Warehouse. I may say it should be 6x6, cost X diamonds, need to be fed, etc... etc.... If the voter reacts to the "12 slots" with "whoa, that's way too many," he or she may vote down the idea of a "Building Warehouse" even though they love the idea. Breaking down the question to the basic idea and the various aspects of what you like/dislike would be a better poll and garner a lot more information.
Once the poll is posted you don't have the ability to suggest changes. This is an okay rule, but probably unnecessary. If you include the "final form" of the original post in the poll people would know what they were voting on even if the discussion was long and complex.
Just some more ideas.
AJ