DART Unofficial MEEP/Opinion Poll

Author: PressF4Respect ,

Topic's posts

Read-only
Posts in total: 75
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    In short, for about a week, there will be a few questions open for the community to vote on. 
    Voting for this poll will be closed at 12 AM PT (UTC -7) on June 19, 2020.
    Even though this is a non-binding un-official MEEP, it is sanctioned by the mods and the results could influence moderation policies and the implementation of future site features.

    About MEEP:
    As seen in the moderation overview

    The Questions:
    Below is an enumerated list of the content to be voted on. A brief explanation of each question is included as well.

    1. Do you agree or disagree with the removal of the following clause in the new COC (the full document can be found here):

    Subsection B1: The Chief and Deputy Moderators and Site Owner
    1. Conduct violations against the Chief Moderator, Deputy Moderator, and the Site Owner will not be enforced, barring certain exceptions
    2. Exceptions to PA.A1.SB.SbB1.PI are limited to:
      1. Plausible, repeated, or serious threats
      2. Hacking or attempted hacking
      3. Staff Impersonation
      4. Doxxing or attempted doxxing
      5. Life- or health-threatening cyberbullying
      6. Violating the privacy of PMs not related to issues of moderation
    • "Yes" indicates agreement with the removal of the above clause in the new COC.
    • "No" indicates disagreement with the removal of the above clause in the new COC.
    2.  Are you for or against mods being allowed to vote in future MEEPs? Note that there are more than two options for this question:
    • "Yes1" indicates a preference for banning all moderators from voting on referendums.
    • "Yes2" indicates a preference for banning the chief and deputy moderators from voting on referendums.
    • "Yes3" indicates a preference for limiting the chief and deputy from voting, save for breaking stalemates.
    • "No" indicates opposition to this refinement.
    3. Are you for or against votes being reported on (and possibly removed) after the voting period is finished? Note that there are more than two options for this question:
    • "Yes1" indicates a preference for votes being reported on (and possibly removed) regardless of whether or not the ratings are changed.
    • "Yes2" indicates a preference for votes being reported on (and possibly removed) only if ratings will be changed to reflect vote changes.
    • "No" indicates opposition to this refinement.
    4. Are you for or against the implementation of a polling section in DART? 
    • "Yes" indicates a preference for the implementation of a polling section in DART.
    • "No" indicates opposition to the implementation of a polling section in DART.
    5. Are you for or against the implementation of advertisements on DART? Note that there are more than two options for this question:
    • "Yes1" indicates a preference for the implementation of pop-up ads, video ads, static banners, and text ads (text ads are like with sponsored links on Google).
    • "Yes2" indicates a preference for the implementation of video ads, static banners, and text ads.
    • "Yes3" indicates a preference for the implementation of static banners and text ads.
    • "Yes4" indicates a preference for the implementation of text ads only.
    • "No" indicates opposition to the implementation of advertisements on DART.
    Voting:
    This poll will use the same voting system as the previous MEEP.

    A vote could look like this:
    1. Yes, 
    2. Yes1, (the 1 signifying a preference for variant 1)
    3. Yes.
    Like this (the missing 2, counts it as abstaining that question):
    1. No, each change should be an individual question
    3. Yes, we shouldn't even have voting rules.

    Or even like this (a vote against 3, but abstaining from the others):
    Wrong direction for voting, so no.


  • Discipulus_Didicit
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,929
    3
    4
    10
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Discipulus_Didicit
    1) Yes
    2) No
    3) Abstain for now
    4) Yes
    5) Yes4
  • bmdrocks21
    bmdrocks21 avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 1,629
    4
    5
    9
    bmdrocks21 avatar
    bmdrocks21
    1. No. I think that the past relationship of mods and members can really affect the enforcement of this one. I am for restricting bans in general and think these rules should apply to everyone to be honest.

    2. No. I think that moderators are very insightful into the feasibility of some rules and can explain their in the reasoning in their responses. Moderators are also some of the most experienced members of this site and eliminating their input would be a detriment.

    3. Yes2. I would like to say that there should be a time limit on this feature, maybe two weeks, in order to hash out any obvious violations and complaints. If there is a case in which there is a last-second vote that isn't quite up to code and changes the results (a very rare occurrence, but still possible), then I think it is perfectly within the realm of reason to remove it.

    4. Yes. Obviously might not be feasible due to financial constraints, but this could be a valuable addition to the site. It adds more variety to the list of site activities and it could even be used to help streamline future MEEPS with automatic vote counting.

    5. Yes3. Financial constraints are brought up occasionally and I am currently unable to contribute to that cause. I think that this would help keep the site running and be able to fund improvements for the future with a more consistent stream of income. I think that video and pop-up ads would take away from the site aesthetic, while the others wouldn't.
  • SupaDudz
    SupaDudz avatar
    Debates: 28
    Forum posts: 10,197
    5
    8
    11
    SupaDudz avatar
    SupaDudz
    4. yes4
    Have to read up on everything else when it isn’t 1am
  • Trent0405
    Trent0405 avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 375
    2
    8
    11
    Trent0405 avatar
    Trent0405
    1. Yes
    2. No
    3. Yes2
    4. Yes
    5. Yes3
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @bmdrocks21
    For #1, you voted no, but based on your description, it seems like you meant to vote yes, that you believe the rules should apply to everyone and thus agree that the mod exception clause should be removed. Just to clarify, voting no means that you disagree with the removal of that clause, which means that you believe subsection B1 should still apply. Voting yes would mean that you agree with its removal.

    Just asking to make sure of your vote, so that I don't miscount it :)
  • bmdrocks21
    bmdrocks21 avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 1,629
    4
    5
    9
    bmdrocks21 avatar
    bmdrocks21
    --> @PressF4Respect
    I think that conduct violations against mods shouldn't be enforced.

    I was a bit confusing because I mentioned putting people on equal footing with mods, and what I was trying to say was "rules should be lax for everyone, similar to how it currently is for mods".
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 40
    Forum posts: 949
    3
    5
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    1. Yes
    2. I am for allowing mods to vote on meeps in all cases, but the wording of the question and responses offered do not offer that option. You have given three options of variations to ban mods from voting, which I am against, or opposition to the refinement, which would be against allowing mods to vote. Why introduce a ban in answers, but not in the question? The presence of "ban" reversed the intent of the first three answers not implied in the question.
    3. Yes1
    4. Yes, but knowing that polling must have: 1. MoE [margin of error], 2. a sufficient number of respondents to give poll credibility [I can provide a formula], 3. properly worded questions that do not impose bias [no poll with an agenda, such as in question #2 of this "poll."], 4. A limit of 10 questions [most polls exceed this number, and respondents become bored with the poll and will answer anything to be done with the poll, thus invalidated the results of the. poll. No exceptions.
    5 Yes4
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 4,457
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @PressF4Respect
    1) No. - The rules as they stand are appropriate and should be enforced.

    2) Yes. - But they should vote last so as not to unduly influence the sheeple.

    3) No. - But neither a yes or no addresses the underlying problem with voting.

    4) Yes - But subject to Mod approval to restrict the moron polls that would defeat the purpose of the polling system.

    5) Abstain. Currently, the site downloads the contents of your clipboard when you go to post. That is unethical. Until practises like that are stopped, I will be against ads.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 283
    Forum posts: 8,651
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    1. Abstain, I firmly believe that that's up to the mods and not us.
    2. No, I will vote Yes3 if another Yes seems to dominate and people want to switch.
    3. Yes2, this had always been my position and it's obvious why. Yes1 is futile and deceptive while No is fue to technical limitations on Rating.
    4. No. Forums should have polls and petition signings as a mechanical addition to thread creation.
    5. Yes2 but I will use Adblock and Privacy Badger. I loathe the tracking of preferences and profiling involved with advertising of that sort.
  • Crocodile
    Crocodile avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 776
    2
    4
    9
    Crocodile avatar
    Crocodile
    1. No
    2. Yes3
    3. Yes2
    4. Yes
    5. Yes3
  • ILikePie5
    ILikePie5 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,145
    3
    3
    8
    ILikePie5 avatar
    ILikePie5
    1. Yes
    2. No
    3. Abstain 
    4. Yes 
    5. Yes3
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @fauxlaw
    Just to clarify, for #2, no means that you are against banning mods from voting, which means you are for allowing mods to vote just like any other user (basically the status quo).
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @bmdrocks21
    Ok, got it. Thanks!
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @SupaDudz
    #4 doesn't have a Yes4 option. Did you mean that vote for #5?
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @ethang5
    For #2, you voted Yes but didn't indicate which one (there are multiple Yes options for #2). Based on your explanation, it seems like your vote for #2 is Yes3. Can you please clarify your vote for #2? Thanks!
  • SupaDudz
    SupaDudz avatar
    Debates: 28
    Forum posts: 10,197
    5
    8
    11
    SupaDudz avatar
    SupaDudz
    --> @PressF4Respect
    Yep lol. That’s what happens when it’s 1:45am
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @SupaDudz
    lol
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 4,457
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @PressF4Respect
    #2. Yes3
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @ethang5
    Thank you for clarifying!
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 4,457
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @PressF4Respect
    You're welcome. Next time you talk to them, tell them to discontinue reading the clipboards of posting members. It isn't nice.
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @ethang5
    I believe that is a technical matter which would need to be brought up with the owner of this site (DebateArt.com).
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 40
    Forum posts: 949
    3
    5
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @PressF4Respect
    Re: #2, let my vote be no.
  • User_2006
    User_2006 avatar
    Debates: 47
    Forum posts: 518
    3
    3
    11
    User_2006 avatar
    User_2006
    --> @PressF4Respect @Ragnar
    1. Yes. Moderators are people. They deserve a life like other debaters. Attacking them in any way is unlawful and incorrect.
    2. No. Moderators are people and they have opinions. Barring the President from sharing of opinions is simply wrong. 
    3. No. Well, life isn't perfect. Plus, deleting votes after the voting period ends would mean a massive change in ELO, Win/Lose rate, all of the things, and all the webpages will be changed. We are too inconvenient to say Yes.
    4. No. Forums suffice. Look at this right here. Polls would essentially need an actual mod to moderate so trolls don't type "Should I marry a cockroach" or something that prevents healthy and moderated polls like the Meeps. Then days of his life will be taken away doing a job that doesn't need to exist.
    5. I say No. DArt is not made for the most part profit, and we don't want it to be like that. We want it to be a sharing of ideas and a habitat to having rational fun. We don't want it to run on sole profit and most of them won't even click on most of the ads. 

  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 31
    Forum posts: 8,115
    4
    5
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @PressF4Respect
    yes

    no

    no

    yes

    yes3