There would be yearly elections for ten seats as mods in which all the plebs of Armor Games got to vote, this would create a lot more activity in the community. Alliances would be formed people would stab each other in the back it would all be very interesting so what do you think would Armor Games as a democracy work?
thats actually a great idea, only thing is that it would be hard to orchestrate, and it would need more then ten mod seats. but still, i second this motion, great concept
The site is owned by Daniel, he distributes authority to those who he finds fitting for the needs they fulfill, and from there they are allowed to delegate some small part of their responsibility to others they find fitting for the role.
This is like saying we all live in my house, but everyone has an equal say and gets to elect their representatives at my dinner table.
That's just not how it works. It's my house, I make the rules, and I may hire people to handle the cleaning, yardwork, take messages, wash the cars, et cetera, but the people who work for these people who I place in charge don't get to elect people among them who dictate what I or my employees do.
Thanks for the comments, I do not belive it would work i have just brought up the topic for discussion, Mr Walker82 you make a good point, but what if Daniel stayed at the top and had power over all, just the mods were voted it.
And wolf1991, well Daniel would still be at the top so they site would still run properly.
This is true, however what Daniel and his developers and administrators are looking for in moderators may be quite different from what we, the users, are looking for and the possibility of us voting in moderators who are not commensurate to what the owners of the site are looking for is very real. This would create a situation by which the moderators would not be the best representatives of what AG is meant to be.
Mr Walker82 you make a good point, but what if Daniel stayed at the top and had power over all, just the mods were voted it.
It still couldn't work! lol
Mods are meant to be hard-working, trustworthy, active, responsible, respectful, friendly users who are devoted to their work and contribute tons to the site. With a voting system, those who fit this description may not get in this way and those that are total opposites will. I mean, look at what happened to John Adams and Thomas Jefferson! The analogy is clearer than a mirror!
Besides. Would the administration trust us with this voting process? No....
hard-working, trustworthy, active, responsible, respectful, friendly users who are devoted to their work and contribute tons to the site
These are the type of people you would expect to be voted in, there would be alote of campaigning and the canidants would have to be at there highest at all times everything they do will win then votes and lose them votes, and in saying this you would breed the best representitives for Armor Games.
I don't think it's a good idea...considering the maturity of some of the members, most people would just make alliances and vote for themselves and whatnot. I think it's just cleaner and easier for the admins to pick the mods. I've never met a mod who was the wrong choice for the duty.
The problem with direct democracy on an internet site is that I don't know anyone. If I could vote for mods, I wouldn't care; nor would I know who to vote for. It would literally be a tiny election controlled by the "special interests" (friends of those running for election). It's also insanely easy to rig an internet vote.
