Can’t we just ignore threads wholesale on the new forum?
That's my understanding, but I think it sidesteps the larger issue of how to handle situations where the language one group uses - even with the best of intentions - might alternate another, equally marginalized group. There won't always be a tech solution, and so we need to learn how to coexist respectfully.
Equally huh
Pretty sure only one group is getting slaughtered en masse at the moment
Guess which one is being told what kinda words they can use
What? Are you equating people who disagree with Jeffe to Ukraine?
I think you're lost, I'm talking about the cowardly unsticking of the River to Sea thread, a thread that remains and is constantly at the top of SE despite efforts to make it harder to find and see
Seriously? You realize that thread title isn't going to fly on the new forum yeah?
Banning "from the river to the sea" would be a pretty radical shift in the direction of the new forums that goes against a ton of what has been said and done, so I don't know why you think it would be.
Did we not vote to respect the lived experiences of minorities? If Jewish people say it makes them uncomfortable then I don't see how you can allow it
Could we not relitigate this discussion, especially as it pertains to a thread on the new board which is not subject to the same rules of this discussion?
If you want to ask the candidates what their views are, go for it, but I think that ground has already been tread.
I mean, if one of the candidate is the one OP and choosing that specific verbiage on CoRe, even after this discussion about how it makes some people uncomfortable, yes I do think it's relevant here?
(Kelor, to be clear, since I know that there was some complaints about people not being clear who was being talked about)
For the rest of the candidates, what are your thoughts on how to handle occurrences of one part of the community using a slogan (for whatever issue) that specifically hurts another part of the community when there are less divisive/harmful alternatives?
@thatassemblyguy
To me that's a form of hate speech or cyberbullying. It has no place on the forum. If someone can't express their support for a cause, no matter how right the cause is, without verbally hurting someone else, then they're doing more harm than good both to their cause and to the people on the forum they are discussing the cause with. They are not contributing to the conversation nor to the community, they are hindering both.
+2
sponoMining for Nose DiamondsBooger CoveRegistered Userregular
Just popping in to say I'll respond to all of the questions tonight and tomorrow, as soon as I've caught up on the thread (currently up to page 13)
Kelor, you state in your submission for the board that you don’t have executive experience. Why should you be selected over other candidates who do have experience in a role such as this?
Why should we, as a community, be content to vote in favor of someone who would basically be learning on the job, especially over other candidates who are experienced in similar roles?
How will you separate your personal feelings from the role you would occupy in a leadership
role in the new forums?
My list will certainly include more than 5 but less than 19. Quite a few folks I didn't know much at all have made great cases for their candidacy in this thread, and I genuinely want to thank them for their time.
I will say that I didn't know anything about Jeffe beyond his name and his general status on the forum for years, largely because I seldom ventured into spaces that he occupied. I didn't have a problem with him at all, except maybe I thought that Retired Mod was a weird rank to have on a forum for a few reasons but as I never interacted with him, it didn't really occupy much space in my brain.
That's a preamble to basically say that no matter what the actual facts on the ground were around his mod forum access and what he did with it, his decision to post that DM in the way he did in the other thread shows, by itself and in isolation away from all historical context, just incredibly bad judgment not befitting of a leader.
If you need any proof of that, just look at what's happened as a result! A thread that got locked, many people banned, multiple people losing faith in the transition efforts with literally less than 24 hours to move-in day at CoRe, and now this thread being thoroughly gummed by the drama directly resultant from his decision to post that DM in the way that he did. Yes, lots of other people were involved, but if people wanna say things like "leadership should be fully accountable for the meltdowns by the folks they hired", then why is Jeffe not held to a similar standard for how his action directly fueled and enabled everything that has since occurred?
(Like forgive me if I am misremembering Marathon's concerns about Tef, but why are you only applying it in one situation and not the other, where the individual must bear the consequences of all ensuing actions that can be linked back? Either the logic with Tef's is wrong, or the logic with Jeffe's case is wrong, or you're cherry-picking your logic.)
We can hash out the text of the DM, how Jeffe interpreted it vs how the TT intended it, how could the TT have done better, where is the proof, but her E-mails, etc... but fundamentally, at the core of everything (pun not actually intended), there were a ton of different ways Jeffe could've handled it, too. And what he did end up choosing to do would've violated most of CoRe's ratifed Values.
Again, I actually think all the mod forum access stuff is noise, I am going to focus on something RECENT and that he DEFINITELY DID, and what he did in the Nominations thread was just... well, it was just deeply disappointing. I expect a lot more consideration for the impact(s) that such an act can have on a community from a prospective community leader, especially given the Values that this community has agreed to uphold.
Holy shit i can't believe i caught up. Learned a lot of things about posters i previously respected. In some ways it's good to know where people stand and what kind of people they really are. And you should always believe people when they tell you who they are.
Raijin has run Saints for 5 or 6 years now and only this time, in the very final one, has he given permission for people to send him things. For those of you unaware, Saints is not secret Santa/satan. The haves, Saints, give to the have less, Saintees. There is no reciprocity. Raijin has done this with no reward expected and explicitly told people not to send him stuff (although i think people did anyways). In addition to my two saintees this year i also sent him something and he was extremely grateful and thankful for it, even though it was just a statue i printed and painted for him (with my shitty painting skills). He has my vote.
I'm a smart dude. Even in graduate school it was not often that i felt my intellect humbled. But Tynic consistently demonstrates an intellect that humbles me. Not in a mean way, in a matter of fact manner seemingly without effort. Her posts are always insightful and useful to read and i value her opinion on pretty much anything. She also has a keen sense of humor that makes me laugh without being injurous to innocent bystanders. As an Australian she offers an opportunity for a different POV from many of the other board candidates. She is a fan of large slobbery dogs, and as an owner of a Great Dane of significant slobber factor, this is vital. She has my vote.
None of this is to detract from the other candidates or to suggest they do not also possess excellent qualities. But in the midst of all the shit flinging i wanted to try and add a bit of positivity. I will ruminate more on what i want to say about the others.
Kelor, you state in your submission for the board that you don’t have executive experience. Why should you be selected over other candidates who do have experience in a role such as this?
Why should we, as a community, be content to vote in favor of someone who would basically be learning on the job, especially over other candidates who are experienced in similar roles?
How will you separate your personal feelings from the role you would occupy in a leadership
role in the new forums?
Just adding @Kelor so the questions are easier to find.
Kelor, you state in your submission for the board that you don’t have executive experience. Why should you be selected over other candidates who do have experience in a role such as this?
Why should we, as a community, be content to vote in favor of someone who would basically be learning on the job, especially over other candidates who are experienced in similar roles?
How will you separate your personal feelings from the role you would occupy in a leadership
role in the new forums?
As someone who also lack executive experience, I would say that I think that, since we all want the community to succeed, we can support each other through the learning process. The important qualities on the board are the drive to preserve and improve the community, and the commitment to do it throughout the community equally.
I think I can easily separate the needs of the community from my personal feelings and opinions, as being able to take a step back and try to be empathetic for all parties is something I have always tried to do, even if I am not always successful.
I think holding Gereg's blowup against Tef is unfair, frankly
Tef already posted with regards to their limited involvement in Gereg's selection and MI confirmed it. I don't think "a person I worked with on documents decided to self-immolate to lose an internet argument" is something I'd hold against them
I do feel Tef has done well in recent months to step back and take on a more neutral voice in general, and their understanding of community building and aspiration to grow the place speaks well to their character and desire to improve our community
I understand if with the broad candidate field that others may not rank them as highly due to their own views and interactions but that's the name of the game with STV
I don't really understand the qualm here. It read to me as Tef saying that Zag's statement wasn't accurate. My charitable read is that Zag may be underselling what the other members of Governance did during that time as there are several members? I suppose Tef could respond if he wants to clarify.
That's correct. Merely setting the record straight. Of note, Zag went on to agree with me. I am willing to ascribe a lot of grace to zag here, it was a very emotional argument and I don't think what he stated (I was the only one doing any work in there) was really reflective of what he believes, heat of the moment sort of thing.
Two questions for you fine folks if you don't mind:
- given the reorg involves a full restructuring, we're going to have a whole lot of people who identified with spaces that will no longer exist. How do you expect to promote unification and bringing the community together? Do you have any initiatives or policy thoughts in mind?
- do you have any thoughts on what specific actions you will take to build out our community? Do you have thoughts on crafting a new culture, creating a welcoming space for new posters, or finding ways to promote the forum to bring in posters who are not being introduced to it by existing ones?
I posted earlier in ITT on this, which I believe is relevant (below). Essentially, the work I have been involved in was largely centred on fixing the exact problem.
Specific actions, it is definitely modelling the behaviours I expect from the rest of the board and the mods. That goes a long way. Working through the thread tagging piece will be valuable, and is something I have been heavily involved in from a design POV. I believe culture is simply a collection of behaviours, so if we focus on primarily encouraging virtuous behaviour and mitigating the negative where necessary, we can build something that just gets better and better over time. There is unfortunately no quick fix, no easy solution.
Many of you have stated that this community is important to you and that you would work to preserve and improve it.
What does this really look like, in your view?
Are we making “problematic” users less welcome and encouraging them to exit the space? Are we examining why some users might engage in “problem behaviour” in the first place and looking at what can be done at a Board level to address those contributing factors? Are we leading by example, with humility and introspection and self-awareness? Are we prioritising the good of the community over our own positions within it, formal leadership or otherwise?
What does “the good of the community” mean to you?
A lot of the toxic behaviour is a function of low trust. I believe if we are able to build that back with accountability, transparency, organisational clarity for decision makers, a consistently applied moderation approach, a democratic and formalised collaborative decision making process, as well as spaces for users to explore and discuss their opinions in safety we are well on our way. This stuff is so important to me, and this community is so important to me, it's why I have made the focus of my assistance to CoRe via the governance subcommittee and prioritised it inside a 45 hour senior management role and being a father to a toddler!
Since the above question just bobbed to the top, I'd like to render my opinion that experience is not the end-all-be-all, and only half of the equation; if those years of experience are in (e.g.) being a terrible manager, that is not a point in favor. It just means that somehow you found a position where you could suck without getting fired for it.
EDIT: Didn't see mod post(s), but I'll leave this here unless told I should move it.
Since the above question just bobbed to the top, I'd like to render my opinion that experience is not the end-all-be-all, and only half of the equation; if those years of experience are in (e.g.) being a terrible manager, that is not a point in favor. It just means that somehow you found a position where you could suck without getting fired for it.
EDIT: Didn't see mod post(s), but I'll leave this here unless told I should move it.
You're good. I don't want general discussion of the candidates in that thread, only questions from forumers and answers from the candidates. Feel free to quote people from the Q&A thread and copypasta it over here in the General thread, though.
My list will certainly include more than 5 but less than 19. Quite a few folks I didn't know much at all have made great cases for their candidacy in this thread, and I genuinely want to thank them for their time.
I will say that I didn't know anything about Jeffe beyond his name and his general status on the forum for years, largely because I seldom ventured into spaces that he occupied. I didn't have a problem with him at all, except maybe I thought that Retired Mod was a weird rank to have on a forum for a few reasons but as I never interacted with him, it didn't really occupy much space in my brain.
That's a preamble to basically say that no matter what the actual facts on the ground were around his mod forum access and what he did with it, his decision to post that DM in the way he did in the other thread shows, by itself and in isolation away from all historical context, just incredibly bad judgment not befitting of a leader.
If you need any proof of that, just look at what's happened as a result! A thread that got locked, many people banned, multiple people losing faith in the transition efforts with literally less than 24 hours to move-in day at CoRe, and now this thread being thoroughly gummed by the drama directly resultant from his decision to post that DM. Yes, lots of other people were involved, but if people wanna say things like "leadership should be fully accountable for the meltdowns by the folks they hired", then why is Jeffe not held to a similar standard for how his action directly fueled and enabled everything that has since occurred?
(Like forgive me if I am misremembering Marathon's concerns about Tef, but why are you only applying it in one situation and not the other, where the individual must bear the consequences of all ensuing actions that can be linked back? Either the logic with Tef's is wrong, or the logic with Jeffe's case is wrong, or you're cherry-picking your logic.)
We can hash out the text of the DM, how Jeffe interpreted it vs how the TT intended it, how could the TT have done better, where is the proof, but her E-mails, etc... but fundamentally, at the core of everything (pun not actually intended), there were a ton of different ways Jeffe could've handled it, too. And what he did end up choosing to do would've violated most of CoRe's ratifed Values.
Again, I actually think all the mod forum access stuff is noise, I am going to focus on something RECENT and that he DEFINITELY DID, and what he did in the Nominations thread was just... well, it was just deeply disappointing. I expect a lot more consideration for the impact(s) that such an act can have on a community from a prospective community leader, especially given the Values that this community has agreed to uphold.
I just want to quote this post to re-highlight it because I almost made the same one hours ago and decided it just wasn't worth it for all the bickering that was going on.
I've lost respect for people I thought better of because they've declared they would vote highly for Jeffe, which doesn't make one bit of sense when you look at that first post he made about the DM. A man with more than 10 years of experience as a mod gets that message and his takeaway from it being "I'm being blackmailed" leaves a lot to be desired of his reading comprehension. And that's being charitable, because it's assuming it wasn't an intentional bad read explicitly to light a pyre in village square. If there was any question about what was intended he should have had a conversation with the team rather than whatever the hell this course of action was. So he either has no concept of how his actions will play out or doesn't care about the consequences - again, terrible qualities for a board member.
All you need to not vote for Jeffe is that first post. The hundreds of posts made on the subject since don't matter. In that one go he proved he's at least bad at the role he held for more than a decade and would be provably bad at the role he was applying for. This is not somebody who should be supported.
Here are my answers to questions up to the end of page 3. At this rate, I expect to be finished with the thread in roughly June. (@Zek I took your question to be one for the thread at large, not the board candidates, feel free to correct me if I was wrong about that)
Here are my answers to questions up to the end of page 3. At this rate, I expect to be finished with the thread in roughly June. (@Zek I took your question to be one for the thread at large, not the board candidates, feel free to correct me if I was wrong about that)
What, in your opinion, is the best movie on Tubitv.com?
I've shamelessly outsourced this one to my advisors and have been told that a Motion Picture entitled The Last Unicorn is considered amongst the finest entertainment the Tubi service has to offer.
Important question, is a hotdog a sandwich?
Ontological arguments always mistake the map for the territory - one cannot form a rigorous and internally consistent set theory representation using natural language. In this and other sandwich debates, I can only refer you to Russell's antinomy.
Early in this process I posited a possible standard that in the Political Subforums, Thread Titles should be refrained from including stuff like "Oh no" or "We're in trouble", or even stuff like "he did WHAT". I think we can agree the emotional bandwidth in dealing with modern political discussion has increased dramatically. Can't do anything about the dead doves actually in the threads, _Caveat Lector_ and all that, but what do the candidates feel about a commitment to keeping political thread titles to a relatively neutral keel, something to the example of how Hahnsoo1 titled every thread about it "The 2024 Election", with the hope of avoiding psychic landmines for those focusing their emotional budget elsewhere?
I would be reluctant to encode any formal rules or procedures for how threads should be titled - what seems like neutrality to one person might come off as downplaying to another, just as what seems like a sardonic joke to one might be making light of a deadly serious situation to another. And the nature of the current geopolitical situation is such that I don't think going into a political subforum and expecting to dodge all psychic damage is a realistic scenario, sorry. But informative, thoughtful, and unambiguous thread titles for politics threads seems like a laudable goal which i would personally encourage. I also hope that posters can listen to each other and give/receive constructive feedback on such things. A brief set of titling examples or guidelines in the subforum stickies would be a good starting point.
A clone of yourself is engaged in a fight with you. You have the choice of a knife or a bat, your opponent gets the one you don't choose.
Knife or bat?
Bat, but only if it's rabid.
You’re in a desert walking along in the sand when all of a sudden you look down, and you see a tortoise, it’s crawling toward you. You reach down, you flip the tortoise over on its back. The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can’t, not without your help. But you’re not helping. Why is that?
Too busy tickling it's coochy-woochy widdle tortoise tum-tum, I imagine.
1)When you look at moderation what are the most important aspects to a mod?
Energy, a reasonably thick skin, a history of level-headedness, and demonstrated ability to get along with a fair % of the forum. Proper moderation is time-consuming and emotionally draining. Mods will often find themselves on the wrong side of everyone in an argument, and have to be able to not take this too personally, and to recognize when they might be too close to a situation or potentially inflaming it and so need to step away and let another person handle it. For this latter reason especially, a full roster of engaged mods who don't mind being asked to pitch in when needed is super important, imo, so I would also want to make sure we got a mod team that has good coverage in terms of both timezones and topicality.
2)How do you plan to support the moderation team if they are harassed, villainized by segments of the community, or attacked? Moding is not always fun and games and you will anger people enforcing the rules.
I think this is kind of a broad question that's difficult to answer in generalities, tbh. For example, quite recently I've seen someone refer to being called racist or sexist in the context of mod actions as abuse and harassment. To me, this sort of comment doesn't clear the bar for abuse; whether valid or not, and unpleasant as it might be to hear, it's essentially just a user characterizing their interpretation of the action. But I'm also aware of much more serious instances of harassment that have occurred, up to and including death threats.
So there's a hell of a spectrum here, which in practice will probably need to be addressed on a case by case basis. To try and cross as much of it as I can
- I'm hopeful that the new, more consensus-driven style of moderation intended to be pursued on CR will dilute serious antagonism to specific moderators, as well as providing a check on how far mods can go unilaterally.
- Similarly, a transparent, easily accessible method for escalating complaints or disagreements about moderation action is vital, in order to rebuild trust in the moderation team as a whole, and diminish the degree to which individual moderators are seen as personal antagonists.
- If there is intractable friction between a segment of the community and a particular moderator, and it is persistent and repeatedly escalated, that will need to be addressed directly by the board, with heavy reference to the CoC. Again, case by case - I can't speak to pure hypotheticals. But I know that rather than trying to parcel out fault, I would rather the board look at the kind of community we wish to foster and encourage, and then take specific actions that will best lead us in that direction.
3)How will you work with others on the committee that hold differing views from you? How do you normally work towards a compromise?
I'm not a huge fan of compromises that leave everyone unhappy - I think that as long as people have goals that aren't totally at loggerheads, usually there is a solution that moves the needle positively for all parties. But I fully expect the board to contain a multiude of viewpoints - honestly I hope it does, I want to be able to get alternate takes on situations, cause I certainly would never pretend to hold all the answers to how to build and sustain a community. I guess the answer is 'assume we have a common underlying goal' (namely, sustaining the community and helping it to thrive, be healthy, and welcoming to diverse voices) and trying to work through disagreements with that lens.
I'm sorry to do this to you but they moved the Q&A to another thread.
My list will certainly include more than 5 but less than 19. Quite a few folks I didn't know much at all have made great cases for their candidacy in this thread, and I genuinely want to thank them for their time.
I will say that I didn't know anything about Jeffe beyond his name and his general status on the forum for years, largely because I seldom ventured into spaces that he occupied. I didn't have a problem with him at all, except maybe I thought that Retired Mod was a weird rank to have on a forum for a few reasons but as I never interacted with him, it didn't really occupy much space in my brain.
That's a preamble to basically say that no matter what the actual facts on the ground were around his mod forum access and what he did with it, his decision to post that DM in the way he did in the other thread shows, by itself and in isolation away from all historical context, just incredibly bad judgment not befitting of a leader.
If you need any proof of that, just look at what's happened as a result! A thread that got locked, many people banned, multiple people losing faith in the transition efforts with literally less than 24 hours to move-in day at CoRe, and now this thread being thoroughly gummed by the drama directly resultant from his decision to post that DM. Yes, lots of other people were involved, but if people wanna say things like "leadership should be fully accountable for the meltdowns by the folks they hired", then why is Jeffe not held to a similar standard for how his action directly fueled and enabled everything that has since occurred?
(Like forgive me if I am misremembering Marathon's concerns about Tef, but why are you only applying it in one situation and not the other, where the individual must bear the consequences of all ensuing actions that can be linked back? Either the logic with Tef's is wrong, or the logic with Jeffe's case is wrong, or you're cherry-picking your logic.)
We can hash out the text of the DM, how Jeffe interpreted it vs how the TT intended it, how could the TT have done better, where is the proof, but her E-mails, etc... but fundamentally, at the core of everything (pun not actually intended), there were a ton of different ways Jeffe could've handled it, too. And what he did end up choosing to do would've violated most of CoRe's ratifed Values.
Again, I actually think all the mod forum access stuff is noise, I am going to focus on something RECENT and that he DEFINITELY DID, and what he did in the Nominations thread was just... well, it was just deeply disappointing. I expect a lot more consideration for the impact(s) that such an act can have on a community from a prospective community leader, especially given the Values that this community has agreed to uphold.
I just want to quote this post to re-highlight it because I almost made the same one hours ago and decided it just wasn't worth it for all the bickering that was going on.
I've lost respect for people I thought better of because they've declared they would vote highly for Jeffe, which doesn't make one bit of sense when you look at that first post he made about the DM. A man with more than 10 years of experience as a mod gets that message and his takeaway from it being "I'm being blackmailed" leaves a lot to be desired of his reading comprehension. And that's being charitable, because it's assuming it wasn't an intentional bad read explicitly to light a pyre in village square. If there was any question about what was intended he should have had a conversation with the team rather than whatever the hell this course of action was. So he either has no concept of how his actions will play out or doesn't care about the consequences - again, terrible qualities for a board member.
All you need to not vote for Jeffe is that first post. The hundreds of posts made on the subject since don't matter. In that one go he proved he's at least bad at the role he held for more than a decade and would be provably bad at the role he was applying for. This is not somebody who should be supported.
It read to me like he was going to prioritise his own candicacy regardless of what would ensue following that post. As you rightly said, he either didn't know (which is him admitting he has not been a competent mod in the past, or at the most generous level he does not demonstrate the level of insight to be an effective community leader) or he didn't care (which is just actively bad). Neither of those puts him high on my list of preferred leaders in any space, but especially a space where clear efforts have been made to be community-led.
A leader who prioritises his own personal agenda and grievances while de-prioritising the impacts these have on the community itself is not a suitable leader for CoRe.
I am aware that he attempted to frame his DM as a way to bring something bad to the community's attention, because if something bad is happening then they deserve to know. I saw that. How he chose to do it still doesn't make sense if I took that claim on face value, which, for the record, I actually did. There are still a great number of other avenues he could have pursued and he would've absolutely landed on one of those options if he did not decide to instead prioritise himself.
My list will certainly include more than 5 but less than 19. Quite a few folks I didn't know much at all have made great cases for their candidacy in this thread, and I genuinely want to thank them for their time.
I will say that I didn't know anything about Jeffe beyond his name and his general status on the forum for years, largely because I seldom ventured into spaces that he occupied. I didn't have a problem with him at all, except maybe I thought that Retired Mod was a weird rank to have on a forum for a few reasons but as I never interacted with him, it didn't really occupy much space in my brain.
That's a preamble to basically say that no matter what the actual facts on the ground were around his mod forum access and what he did with it, his decision to post that DM in the way he did in the other thread shows, by itself and in isolation away from all historical context, just incredibly bad judgment not befitting of a leader.
If you need any proof of that, just look at what's happened as a result! A thread that got locked, many people banned, multiple people losing faith in the transition efforts with literally less than 24 hours to move-in day at CoRe, and now this thread being thoroughly gummed by the drama directly resultant from his decision to post that DM. Yes, lots of other people were involved, but if people wanna say things like "leadership should be fully accountable for the meltdowns by the folks they hired", then why is Jeffe not held to a similar standard for how his action directly fueled and enabled everything that has since occurred?
(Like forgive me if I am misremembering Marathon's concerns about Tef, but why are you only applying it in one situation and not the other, where the individual must bear the consequences of all ensuing actions that can be linked back? Either the logic with Tef's is wrong, or the logic with Jeffe's case is wrong, or you're cherry-picking your logic.)
We can hash out the text of the DM, how Jeffe interpreted it vs how the TT intended it, how could the TT have done better, where is the proof, but her E-mails, etc... but fundamentally, at the core of everything (pun not actually intended), there were a ton of different ways Jeffe could've handled it, too. And what he did end up choosing to do would've violated most of CoRe's ratifed Values.
Again, I actually think all the mod forum access stuff is noise, I am going to focus on something RECENT and that he DEFINITELY DID, and what he did in the Nominations thread was just... well, it was just deeply disappointing. I expect a lot more consideration for the impact(s) that such an act can have on a community from a prospective community leader, especially given the Values that this community has agreed to uphold.
I just want to quote this post to re-highlight it because I almost made the same one hours ago and decided it just wasn't worth it for all the bickering that was going on.
I've lost respect for people I thought better of because they've declared they would vote highly for Jeffe, which doesn't make one bit of sense when you look at that first post he made about the DM. A man with more than 10 years of experience as a mod gets that message and his takeaway from it being "I'm being blackmailed" leaves a lot to be desired of his reading comprehension. And that's being charitable, because it's assuming it wasn't an intentional bad read explicitly to light a pyre in village square. If there was any question about what was intended he should have had a conversation with the team rather than whatever the hell this course of action was. So he either has no concept of how his actions will play out or doesn't care about the consequences - again, terrible qualities for a board member.
All you need to not vote for Jeffe is that first post. The hundreds of posts made on the subject since don't matter. In that one go he proved he's at least bad at the role he held for more than a decade and would be provably bad at the role he was applying for. This is not somebody who should be supported.
It read to me like he was going to prioritise his own candicacy regardless of what would ensue following that post. As you rightly said, he either didn't know (which is him admitting he has not been a competent mod in the past, or at the most generous level he does not demonstrate the level of insight to be an effective community leader) or he didn't care (which is just actively bad). Neither of those puts him high on my list of preferred leaders in any space, but especially a space where clear efforts have been made to be community-led.
A leader who prioritises his own personal agenda and grievances while de-prioritising the impacts these have on the community itself is not a suitable leader for CoRe.
I am aware that he attempted to frame his DM as a way to bring something bad to the community's attention, because if something bad is happening then they deserve to know. I saw that. How he chose to do it still doesn't make sense if I took that claim on face value, which, for the record, I actually did. There are still a great number of other avenues he could have pursued and he would've absolutely landed on one of those options if he did not decide to instead prioritise himself.
I wish I could see this as anything other than a person putting their own ego over the community. I have led communities where my actions have accidentally caused a rift. Where despite my best efforts I have accidentally caused harm by trying to do good. On those rare occasions it has happened I have always offered to step down, or even step out if required. This is because the community comes first.
The community is more important than any one person in it. People come and go all the time. Sometimes they mean a lot to us, and sometimes they mean very little. The community itself continues to evolve and change to adapt to these arrivals and departures. It grows into new beautiful things.
Instead of trying to help peacefully work through this situation punches started being thrown. I cannot possibly fathom the goal of this action. It has injured us all, and the fabric that holds us together. Fabric that has strained to the point of snapping very recently.
I am open to other views, but they are difficult to see. I am trying to square the damage this had to be known would happen when it came out with the penalty being not getting a leadership position. Maybe someone else can help me out.
+7
thatassemblyguyJanitor of Technical Debt.Registered Userregular
@Raijin Quickfoot - I appreciate your open and honest response in the Q&A thread. Thank you!
My list will certainly include more than 5 but less than 19. Quite a few folks I didn't know much at all have made great cases for their candidacy in this thread, and I genuinely want to thank them for their time.
I will say that I didn't know anything about Jeffe beyond his name and his general status on the forum for years, largely because I seldom ventured into spaces that he occupied. I didn't have a problem with him at all, except maybe I thought that Retired Mod was a weird rank to have on a forum for a few reasons but as I never interacted with him, it didn't really occupy much space in my brain.
That's a preamble to basically say that no matter what the actual facts on the ground were around his mod forum access and what he did with it, his decision to post that DM in the way he did in the other thread shows, by itself and in isolation away from all historical context, just incredibly bad judgment not befitting of a leader.
If you need any proof of that, just look at what's happened as a result! A thread that got locked, many people banned, multiple people losing faith in the transition efforts with literally less than 24 hours to move-in day at CoRe, and now this thread being thoroughly gummed by the drama directly resultant from his decision to post that DM. Yes, lots of other people were involved, but if people wanna say things like "leadership should be fully accountable for the meltdowns by the folks they hired", then why is Jeffe not held to a similar standard for how his action directly fueled and enabled everything that has since occurred?
(Like forgive me if I am misremembering Marathon's concerns about Tef, but why are you only applying it in one situation and not the other, where the individual must bear the consequences of all ensuing actions that can be linked back? Either the logic with Tef's is wrong, or the logic with Jeffe's case is wrong, or you're cherry-picking your logic.)
We can hash out the text of the DM, how Jeffe interpreted it vs how the TT intended it, how could the TT have done better, where is the proof, but her E-mails, etc... but fundamentally, at the core of everything (pun not actually intended), there were a ton of different ways Jeffe could've handled it, too. And what he did end up choosing to do would've violated most of CoRe's ratifed Values.
Again, I actually think all the mod forum access stuff is noise, I am going to focus on something RECENT and that he DEFINITELY DID, and what he did in the Nominations thread was just... well, it was just deeply disappointing. I expect a lot more consideration for the impact(s) that such an act can have on a community from a prospective community leader, especially given the Values that this community has agreed to uphold.
I just want to quote this post to re-highlight it because I almost made the same one hours ago and decided it just wasn't worth it for all the bickering that was going on.
I've lost respect for people I thought better of because they've declared they would vote highly for Jeffe, which doesn't make one bit of sense when you look at that first post he made about the DM. A man with more than 10 years of experience as a mod gets that message and his takeaway from it being "I'm being blackmailed" leaves a lot to be desired of his reading comprehension. And that's being charitable, because it's assuming it wasn't an intentional bad read explicitly to light a pyre in village square. If there was any question about what was intended he should have had a conversation with the team rather than whatever the hell this course of action was. So he either has no concept of how his actions will play out or doesn't care about the consequences - again, terrible qualities for a board member.
All you need to not vote for Jeffe is that first post. The hundreds of posts made on the subject since don't matter. In that one go he proved he's at least bad at the role he held for more than a decade and would be provably bad at the role he was applying for. This is not somebody who should be supported.
It read to me like he was going to prioritise his own candicacy regardless of what would ensue following that post. As you rightly said, he either didn't know (which is him admitting he has not been a competent mod in the past, or at the most generous level he does not demonstrate the level of insight to be an effective community leader) or he didn't care (which is just actively bad). Neither of those puts him high on my list of preferred leaders in any space, but especially a space where clear efforts have been made to be community-led.
A leader who prioritises his own personal agenda and grievances while de-prioritising the impacts these have on the community itself is not a suitable leader for CoRe.
I am aware that he attempted to frame his DM as a way to bring something bad to the community's attention, because if something bad is happening then they deserve to know. I saw that. How he chose to do it still doesn't make sense if I took that claim on face value, which, for the record, I actually did. There are still a great number of other avenues he could have pursued and he would've absolutely landed on one of those options if he did not decide to instead prioritise himself.
I wish I could see this as anything other than a person putting their own ego over the community. I have led communities where my actions have accidentally caused a rift. Where despite my best efforts I have accidentally caused harm by trying to do good. On those rare occasions it has happened I have always offered to step down, or even step out if required. This is because the community comes first.
The community is more important than any one person in it. People come and go all the time. Sometimes they mean a lot to us, and sometimes they mean very little. The community itself continues to evolve and change to adapt to these arrivals and departures. It grows into new beautiful things.
Instead of trying to help peacefully work through this situation punches started being thrown. I cannot possibly fathom the goal of this action. It has injured us all, and the fabric that holds us together. Fabric that has strained to the point of snapping very recently.
I am open to other views, but they are difficult to see. I am trying to square the damage this had to be known would happen when it came out with the penalty being not getting a leadership position. Maybe someone else can help me out.
I've found Jeffe's behavior - both from the post, and everything else afterwards - incredibly telling. Zero self-awareness at best. Active malice at worst. To see that behavior then lauded as "Standing up for themselves", or some of the other knots folks have tied to support it has been profoundly disappointing.
"He won't leave despite all the criticism" being lauded as a strength sure is a take.
There's absolutely something to be said for not backing down from convictions and standing on business, but generally that means there are other people behind you that you are protecting by not backing down... not just yourself.
+14
thatassemblyguyJanitor of Technical Debt.Registered Userregular
I have... a lot more I want to say about the subject of Jeffe's candidacy, but a lot of ink has been spilled about it already, so I'll save the longer effort post for later and cut to what I think is a relevant point:
If ElJeffe wants to ensure CoRe gets off to the best start possible, he would resign as a candidate and let the election play out for the other 18.
Regardless of anyone's opinion on how the Transition Team chose to handle this situation, Jeffe choosing to share that information in the way he did has so thoroughly poisoned the well of discussion that it has made this thread not only so difficult to navigate, it had to be split in half, but so full of acrimony and toxicity that it has actively impeded the other candidates' ability to respond to questions about their candidacy.
If someone would seriously want to be considered for a leadership position in a community, I would consider Jeffe's actions to be disqualifying. Even if the consequences of the disclosure were inadvertent, I would expect a candidate truly concerned about our community's ability to continue into our new home unimpeded to look at the outcome of their actions, and rescind their candidacy so that the other candidates for office can continue without having to spar with the continued fallout of his decisions.
Hell, I wouldn't oppose him coming back to contend for election in a future cycle. That's not to say I wouldn't still have significant reservations or that I wouldn't need to be convinced to vote for him, I won't blow smoke up anyone's ass and pretend otherwise, but at the very least, we'd be able to get the Board installed and CoRE off on the right foot with an election that wasn't dogged by controversy for a full day before a vote was ever cast.
This isn't about cancellation, it's not a witch hunt, it's about as impartial a reason I can offer for Jeffe to withdraw. And, you know what? You want to convince all of us who have concerns about Jeffe's candidacy that this really is about doing what's best for the community? I can't imagine a clearer example of taking accountability than this, right here.
But ultimately, that's his decision, and it's completely out of my hands. All I can say is that if Jeffe wants to prove his commitment to making sure this community is managed the best way possible, this would go a long way towards convincing me.
I was thinking about making sure my board picks represent diverse viewpoints, and it occurred to me that there isn't actually any way for me to vote for that in this system? I hope it will happen organically if others are thinking similarly, but that balance could be thrown off pretty easily. I don't have any better ideas about how to make that happen though.
I was thinking about making sure my board picks represent diverse viewpoints, and it occurred to me that there isn't actually any way for me to vote for that in this system? I hope it will happen organically if others are thinking similarly, but that balance could be thrown off pretty easily. I don't have any better ideas about how to make that happen though.
I think you use minority identities on the forum as a bit of a tie breaker in this case. It is a struggle with any election, but I think giving extra weight to those with less common lived experiences helps. Fortunately the DEIA position should bring in some differing views and will be there with the board for everything as well.
0
minor incidentpublicly subsidized!privately profitable!Registered User, Transition Teamregular
edited April 1
IMPORTANT UPDATE:
Thanks to the hard work of @Infidel@Delzhand and @syndalis we have a brand new authentication system built out for our election. This was an all day project that these folks tackled while dealing with everything else, so they deserve immense amounts of credit.
The way it works is: At some point in the next 12 hours you will receive a PM from the account @corevotes with a "voting code"
This is a one-time use code just for you that you'll need to enter on the voting website to access your ballot. There are no do-overs on these. Once you use your code to vote, it's done. No changes to your submitted ballot, no additional codes or chances to re-vote. Be absolutely certain when you cast your vote.
This process takes a good bit of time because of rate limiting on PMs here on Vanilla, so you may get your code in the next 10 minutes, or you may get it in 10 hours. KEEP AN EYE ON YOUR PM INBOX. Voting has been extended until 11:59pm EDT on April 8th to account for this delay.
Thank you for your patience and giving us a chance to act on your feedback to build out a more secure voting apparatus.
minor incident on
Hell, New Jersey, it said on the letter. Delivered without comment. So be it!
I was thinking about making sure my board picks represent diverse viewpoints, and it occurred to me that there isn't actually any way for me to vote for that in this system? I hope it will happen organically if others are thinking similarly, but that balance could be thrown off pretty easily. I don't have any better ideas about how to make that happen though.
In theory that should come from the voting system making it impossible for any interest group from being able to grab all the seats
0
minor incidentpublicly subsidized!privately profitable!Registered User, Transition Teamregular
Do I use my CoRe PIN to vote?
No! You'll be sent a PM with a unique 8-letter Voting Code. Use that. We're merely piggy-backing on the PIN registry to act as our list of registered voters to send voting codes to.
What about banned users?
Recently banned users have been manually removed from the voter rolls.
I already voted earlier before this voting code business, do I have to re-vote?
Yes. Sadly this is unavoidable. Only a couple of dozen people got in before we halted the initial election, and for the security of the process, we're starting over. Even if you already voted before YOU MUST VOTE AGAIN WHEN YOU GET YOUR VOTING CODE.
minor incident on
Hell, New Jersey, it said on the letter. Delivered without comment. So be it!
Out of curiosity, how many people are eligible to vote?
Basically, what is the size of the remaining community, at least initially (with an understanding that more people will hopefully get their codes, so this is more of a floor than an absolute)?
We've had a lot of estimates and extrapolation from various votes, this seems like one of the more accurate headcounts we'll have had in a while.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Posts
I mean, if one of the candidate is the one OP and choosing that specific verbiage on CoRe, even after this discussion about how it makes some people uncomfortable, yes I do think it's relevant here?
(Kelor, to be clear, since I know that there was some complaints about people not being clear who was being talked about)
@thatassemblyguy
To me that's a form of hate speech or cyberbullying. It has no place on the forum. If someone can't express their support for a cause, no matter how right the cause is, without verbally hurting someone else, then they're doing more harm than good both to their cause and to the people on the forum they are discussing the cause with. They are not contributing to the conversation nor to the community, they are hindering both.
*Hovers finger over ignore button* you don't say...
We can do it in a video game, I guess
Why should we, as a community, be content to vote in favor of someone who would basically be learning on the job, especially over other candidates who are experienced in similar roles?
How will you separate your personal feelings from the role you would occupy in a leadership
role in the new forums?
I will say that I didn't know anything about Jeffe beyond his name and his general status on the forum for years, largely because I seldom ventured into spaces that he occupied. I didn't have a problem with him at all, except maybe I thought that Retired Mod was a weird rank to have on a forum for a few reasons but as I never interacted with him, it didn't really occupy much space in my brain.
That's a preamble to basically say that no matter what the actual facts on the ground were around his mod forum access and what he did with it, his decision to post that DM in the way he did in the other thread shows, by itself and in isolation away from all historical context, just incredibly bad judgment not befitting of a leader.
If you need any proof of that, just look at what's happened as a result! A thread that got locked, many people banned, multiple people losing faith in the transition efforts with literally less than 24 hours to move-in day at CoRe, and now this thread being thoroughly gummed by the drama directly resultant from his decision to post that DM in the way that he did. Yes, lots of other people were involved, but if people wanna say things like "leadership should be fully accountable for the meltdowns by the folks they hired", then why is Jeffe not held to a similar standard for how his action directly fueled and enabled everything that has since occurred?
(Like forgive me if I am misremembering Marathon's concerns about Tef, but why are you only applying it in one situation and not the other, where the individual must bear the consequences of all ensuing actions that can be linked back? Either the logic with Tef's is wrong, or the logic with Jeffe's case is wrong, or you're cherry-picking your logic.)
We can hash out the text of the DM, how Jeffe interpreted it vs how the TT intended it, how could the TT have done better, where is the proof, but her E-mails, etc... but fundamentally, at the core of everything (pun not actually intended), there were a ton of different ways Jeffe could've handled it, too. And what he did end up choosing to do would've violated most of CoRe's ratifed Values.
Again, I actually think all the mod forum access stuff is noise, I am going to focus on something RECENT and that he DEFINITELY DID, and what he did in the Nominations thread was just... well, it was just deeply disappointing. I expect a lot more consideration for the impact(s) that such an act can have on a community from a prospective community leader, especially given the Values that this community has agreed to uphold.
Raijin has run Saints for 5 or 6 years now and only this time, in the very final one, has he given permission for people to send him things. For those of you unaware, Saints is not secret Santa/satan. The haves, Saints, give to the have less, Saintees. There is no reciprocity. Raijin has done this with no reward expected and explicitly told people not to send him stuff (although i think people did anyways). In addition to my two saintees this year i also sent him something and he was extremely grateful and thankful for it, even though it was just a statue i printed and painted for him (with my shitty painting skills). He has my vote.
I'm a smart dude. Even in graduate school it was not often that i felt my intellect humbled. But Tynic consistently demonstrates an intellect that humbles me. Not in a mean way, in a matter of fact manner seemingly without effort. Her posts are always insightful and useful to read and i value her opinion on pretty much anything. She also has a keen sense of humor that makes me laugh without being injurous to innocent bystanders. As an Australian she offers an opportunity for a different POV from many of the other board candidates. She is a fan of large slobbery dogs, and as an owner of a Great Dane of significant slobber factor, this is vital. She has my vote.
None of this is to detract from the other candidates or to suggest they do not also possess excellent qualities. But in the midst of all the shit flinging i wanted to try and add a bit of positivity. I will ruminate more on what i want to say about the others.
PSN:Furlion
Just adding @Kelor so the questions are easier to find.
MHWilds ID: JF9LL8L3
As someone who also lack executive experience, I would say that I think that, since we all want the community to succeed, we can support each other through the learning process. The important qualities on the board are the drive to preserve and improve the community, and the commitment to do it throughout the community equally.
I think I can easily separate the needs of the community from my personal feelings and opinions, as being able to take a step back and try to be empathetic for all parties is something I have always tried to do, even if I am not always successful.
https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/254049/board-candidate-q-a
@Fencingsax Can you quote your reply and move it to the Q&A thread?
Also, @Marathon, Feel free to repeat your question in the Q&A thread.
MHWilds ID: JF9LL8L3
That's correct. Merely setting the record straight. Of note, Zag went on to agree with me. I am willing to ascribe a lot of grace to zag here, it was a very emotional argument and I don't think what he stated (I was the only one doing any work in there) was really reflective of what he believes, heat of the moment sort of thing.
I posted earlier in ITT on this, which I believe is relevant (below). Essentially, the work I have been involved in was largely centred on fixing the exact problem.
Specific actions, it is definitely modelling the behaviours I expect from the rest of the board and the mods. That goes a long way. Working through the thread tagging piece will be valuable, and is something I have been heavily involved in from a design POV. I believe culture is simply a collection of behaviours, so if we focus on primarily encouraging virtuous behaviour and mitigating the negative where necessary, we can build something that just gets better and better over time. There is unfortunately no quick fix, no easy solution.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better
bit.ly/2XQM1ke
EDIT: Didn't see mod post(s), but I'll leave this here unless told I should move it.
@spono I've moved all the Q&A stuff to its own thread here:
https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/254049/board-candidate-q-a#latest
Please post your replies in that thread.
MHWilds ID: JF9LL8L3
Do you want me to drop that initial batch in there too or just going forwards?
You're good. I don't want general discussion of the candidates in that thread, only questions from forumers and answers from the candidates. Feel free to quote people from the Q&A thread and copypasta it over here in the General thread, though.
MHWilds ID: JF9LL8L3
https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/254049/board-candidate-q-a#latest
This will make it easier to ask and answer questions for everyone.
MHWilds ID: JF9LL8L3
These morphing announce->discussion->splinter threads
What a world
Agreed. Having the thread titles be similar but with a different label would help, like:
Inaugural Board Elections 2025: Candidate Q&A
Inaugural Board Elections 2025: Non-Q&A Discussion
Sonofa.
I mean this will make things easier for my spreadsheet I guess, but now I gotta find my place again.
Switch Friend Code: SW-1406-1275-7906
I just want to quote this post to re-highlight it because I almost made the same one hours ago and decided it just wasn't worth it for all the bickering that was going on.
I've lost respect for people I thought better of because they've declared they would vote highly for Jeffe, which doesn't make one bit of sense when you look at that first post he made about the DM. A man with more than 10 years of experience as a mod gets that message and his takeaway from it being "I'm being blackmailed" leaves a lot to be desired of his reading comprehension. And that's being charitable, because it's assuming it wasn't an intentional bad read explicitly to light a pyre in village square. If there was any question about what was intended he should have had a conversation with the team rather than whatever the hell this course of action was. So he either has no concept of how his actions will play out or doesn't care about the consequences - again, terrible qualities for a board member.
All you need to not vote for Jeffe is that first post. The hundreds of posts made on the subject since don't matter. In that one go he proved he's at least bad at the role he held for more than a decade and would be provably bad at the role he was applying for. This is not somebody who should be supported.
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
edit: SON ofa
see Q/A post for the quote of this original
I'm sorry to do this to you but they moved the Q&A to another thread.
It read to me like he was going to prioritise his own candicacy regardless of what would ensue following that post. As you rightly said, he either didn't know (which is him admitting he has not been a competent mod in the past, or at the most generous level he does not demonstrate the level of insight to be an effective community leader) or he didn't care (which is just actively bad). Neither of those puts him high on my list of preferred leaders in any space, but especially a space where clear efforts have been made to be community-led.
A leader who prioritises his own personal agenda and grievances while de-prioritising the impacts these have on the community itself is not a suitable leader for CoRe.
I am aware that he attempted to frame his DM as a way to bring something bad to the community's attention, because if something bad is happening then they deserve to know. I saw that. How he chose to do it still doesn't make sense if I took that claim on face value, which, for the record, I actually did. There are still a great number of other avenues he could have pursued and he would've absolutely landed on one of those options if he did not decide to instead prioritise himself.
I wish I could see this as anything other than a person putting their own ego over the community. I have led communities where my actions have accidentally caused a rift. Where despite my best efforts I have accidentally caused harm by trying to do good. On those rare occasions it has happened I have always offered to step down, or even step out if required. This is because the community comes first.
The community is more important than any one person in it. People come and go all the time. Sometimes they mean a lot to us, and sometimes they mean very little. The community itself continues to evolve and change to adapt to these arrivals and departures. It grows into new beautiful things.
Instead of trying to help peacefully work through this situation punches started being thrown. I cannot possibly fathom the goal of this action. It has injured us all, and the fabric that holds us together. Fabric that has strained to the point of snapping very recently.
I am open to other views, but they are difficult to see. I am trying to square the damage this had to be known would happen when it came out with the penalty being not getting a leadership position. Maybe someone else can help me out.
I've found Jeffe's behavior - both from the post, and everything else afterwards - incredibly telling. Zero self-awareness at best. Active malice at worst. To see that behavior then lauded as "Standing up for themselves", or some of the other knots folks have tied to support it has been profoundly disappointing.
Steam: https://steamcommunity.com/id/TheZombiePenguin
Stream: https://www.twitch.tv/thezombiepenguin/
Switch: 0293 6817 9891
There's absolutely something to be said for not backing down from convictions and standing on business, but generally that means there are other people behind you that you are protecting by not backing down... not just yourself.
If ElJeffe wants to ensure CoRe gets off to the best start possible, he would resign as a candidate and let the election play out for the other 18.
Regardless of anyone's opinion on how the Transition Team chose to handle this situation, Jeffe choosing to share that information in the way he did has so thoroughly poisoned the well of discussion that it has made this thread not only so difficult to navigate, it had to be split in half, but so full of acrimony and toxicity that it has actively impeded the other candidates' ability to respond to questions about their candidacy.
If someone would seriously want to be considered for a leadership position in a community, I would consider Jeffe's actions to be disqualifying. Even if the consequences of the disclosure were inadvertent, I would expect a candidate truly concerned about our community's ability to continue into our new home unimpeded to look at the outcome of their actions, and rescind their candidacy so that the other candidates for office can continue without having to spar with the continued fallout of his decisions.
Hell, I wouldn't oppose him coming back to contend for election in a future cycle. That's not to say I wouldn't still have significant reservations or that I wouldn't need to be convinced to vote for him, I won't blow smoke up anyone's ass and pretend otherwise, but at the very least, we'd be able to get the Board installed and CoRE off on the right foot with an election that wasn't dogged by controversy for a full day before a vote was ever cast.
This isn't about cancellation, it's not a witch hunt, it's about as impartial a reason I can offer for Jeffe to withdraw. And, you know what? You want to convince all of us who have concerns about Jeffe's candidacy that this really is about doing what's best for the community? I can't imagine a clearer example of taking accountability than this, right here.
But ultimately, that's his decision, and it's completely out of my hands. All I can say is that if Jeffe wants to prove his commitment to making sure this community is managed the best way possible, this would go a long way towards convincing me.
I think you use minority identities on the forum as a bit of a tie breaker in this case. It is a struggle with any election, but I think giving extra weight to those with less common lived experiences helps. Fortunately the DEIA position should bring in some differing views and will be there with the board for everything as well.
Thanks to the hard work of @Infidel @Delzhand and @syndalis we have a brand new authentication system built out for our election. This was an all day project that these folks tackled while dealing with everything else, so they deserve immense amounts of credit.
The way it works is: At some point in the next 12 hours you will receive a PM from the account @corevotes with a "voting code"
This is a one-time use code just for you that you'll need to enter on the voting website to access your ballot. There are no do-overs on these. Once you use your code to vote, it's done. No changes to your submitted ballot, no additional codes or chances to re-vote. Be absolutely certain when you cast your vote.
This process takes a good bit of time because of rate limiting on PMs here on Vanilla, so you may get your code in the next 10 minutes, or you may get it in 10 hours. KEEP AN EYE ON YOUR PM INBOX. Voting has been extended until 11:59pm EDT on April 8th to account for this delay.
Thank you for your patience and giving us a chance to act on your feedback to build out a more secure voting apparatus.
In theory that should come from the voting system making it impossible for any interest group from being able to grab all the seats
If I didn't register for a CoRe PIN, then what?
Register for one now, or ASAP. You'll be added to the registry to get a voting code. It may take up to 24 hours depending on the timing though. Instructions for registering your CoRe PIN here: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/253866/pre-register-now-for-coin-return-org/p1
Do I use my CoRe PIN to vote?
No! You'll be sent a PM with a unique 8-letter Voting Code. Use that. We're merely piggy-backing on the PIN registry to act as our list of registered voters to send voting codes to.
What about banned users?
Recently banned users have been manually removed from the voter rolls.
I already voted earlier before this voting code business, do I have to re-vote?
Yes. Sadly this is unavoidable. Only a couple of dozen people got in before we halted the initial election, and for the security of the process, we're starting over. Even if you already voted before YOU MUST VOTE AGAIN WHEN YOU GET YOUR VOTING CODE.
Basically, what is the size of the remaining community, at least initially (with an understanding that more people will hopefully get their codes, so this is more of a floor than an absolute)?
We've had a lot of estimates and extrapolation from various votes, this seems like one of the more accurate headcounts we'll have had in a while.
I don't wanna throw away my vote by voting early as things get more heated over the next week!
Is there anyone who is running on the precipice of being banned?