bugmaniacbob
Was fun while it lasted
I'd just like to say that I have no qualms with Wyverii's updated proposal, provided that there is a proviso written somewhere that obliges the Topic Leader to make a conscientious effort to direct the start of the discussion (or a better wording than that - essentially that they begin the discussion with a vision or, rather, direction, whether in the OP or not). Also I'll let the ATL matter drop since it seems plain that nobody else wants it.
On the other hand, if we're trying to promote transparency in decision-making and all that, then I suppose the discussion thread is justified in a way. I just don't see what real good could come of it.
The second thread seems faintly pointless, if I'm honest. The candidates are always stupidly qualified and any reasons you may have to select them over any other will always either be subjective or speculative, in the manner of "I don't know them that well" or "metagame knowledge is more important than artistic ability" or "they haven't done anything which shows an ability to deal with pressure in the past". If we're trying to get rid of the "ego-stroking", as it were, I would have thought putting it on a pedestal was the opposite thing we wanted to do. In any case, deciding objectively between a bunch of very well-qualified members will almost certainly degenerate whatever we try to do with it, so I'd just leave that stage out entirely, and go from nominations -> bold vote without comments straight away.Here's the question I want answered on before drawing this to a close:
How will the TL be selected?
My thoughts on this are that we allow the TLs to nominate themselves as usual in one thread. A second thread will discuss the nominations without a vote among the PRC. The final thread will give ONLY a preference vote for the Topic Leader, with no commentary allowed. This will avoid the ego stroking the previous process has been criticized for while still allowing discussion of the nominations.
Any suggestions/improvements/criticisms?
On the other hand, if we're trying to promote transparency in decision-making and all that, then I suppose the discussion thread is justified in a way. I just don't see what real good could come of it.