Lets discuss some new rules regarding feature nomination

With permission from Rabid to make this topic, I think we should discuss some rules for nominating tracks. I'm willing to bet that this hostility is being caused from this overwhelming ammount of "feature worthy" tracks being made at an alarming rate, it's causing a lot of conflicting opinions. Since track nominations are a public thing now, it's time to set some standards. These are the two rules I propose:

1) We must wait three days until a track can be nominated. This gives us time to discuss the track in the original thread and allows us to more rationalize our opinions. IE instead of eveyone going "FEECHURR DIS NAO!!!!!1!1!!1", it becomes "In my humble opinion, I think this track deserves to be featured."

2) Each person is only allowed one comment on the nomination thread. We are only allowed to discuss why we voted, and we are not allowed to adress anyone else who posted. This should in theory keep people from bickering in the threads like children.

Anyways, discuss.

I like this idea, in all honesty. Whenever I had heard we were going to add criteria for a feature, my initial response was "Then why would there be a voting process if everything is decided based on a set checklist?" But I do see what you were referring to now, and I can easily agree to these, especially the one comment per. With that being put in place, I also believe it acceptable for people to question why someone says what they do, however, you can always catch the person in chat later on if you truly feel the need to do so.

To be honest, I don't see the point in featuring a track at all

For a little while, I was the same way. With so few tracks coming out, it really does feel like everything's featured, just because everyone sees every track anyways, so what does it matter?

But aside from that, it is a nice compilation of the comments, and it means a lot to track makers, especially those who don't get as many features, whenever people recognize their work. Plus, it's great for archives, in the same way that it was really cool back whenever we did the MotW results video compilations. So I see no problem with continuing the feature system.

I was not really sure if I liked rule #1 when you first proposed it but after thinking for a bit I think I will agree to it if others think it is a good idea.

The main drawback would be that people would be less likely to nominate. But maybe that's okay, seeing as how the community is (in my opinion) generally yes-vote-happy in nomination threads. And I agree that people will probably be more likely to post in the actual track thread (sheldon never actually posted in the HN2 original thread)

I like rule #2, except that I want to add that people can't directly attack another person's opinion within their one post.

I liked discussion between people about featuring tracks in the past so I wish we could actually have some back and forth, but I think HN2 has shown everyone that this is too prone to degenerate into personal attacks, at least with this community at this time. Disappointing? Yeah. But it's probably for the best.

TL;DR I agree with kev and opal

Another thing we could do is make our responses blind. Instead of having all of us post to the thread, where everyone can see it, we can send our votes to a moderator, and have them tally up and post the results in the thread. Unless we want to keep the ability to sway other people's votes, which in my opinion isn't really necessary.

ehhhh I don't know about forcing people to send PMs, would probably result in much lower vote counts.

I can make it so that anyone can nominate and anyone can vote, but nobody can post a response. That could work. Thoughts? Personally I am opposed because I like hearing people's reasoning, but I am open to argument.

I would make the poll results unviewable to regular members until after they vote if I could. I've lamented this since the early days of IRTL in 2007.

EDIT: oh and also

Opal Rider wrote:For a little while, I was the same way. With so few tracks coming out, it really does feel like everything's featured, just because everyone sees every track anyways, so what does it matter?

But aside from that, it is a nice compilation of the comments, and it means a lot to track makers, especially those who don't get as many features, whenever people recognize their work. Plus, it's great for archives, in the same way that it was really cool back whenever we did the MotW results video compilations. So I see no problem with continuing the feature system.

THIS. Put better words to it than I could.

I'm guessing everyone agrees with what I proposed if no one else is discussing it, and those who have have said that they agreed.

^yee

Indeed, more organization here would be good.

Yeah, I agree with the system you proposed. And if someone creates a thread before 3 days is up, there's not going to be bans or anything ridiculous like that, just probably remind them to wait another day or two, because this is 100% going to happen, haha.
With rule #2, that's perfectly cool, can make sure that everyone's posts are of a good quality to help sway other people's opinions.

SqrlEDIT: I'll make the thread. Merged the post back into this thread.

Since it seemed pretty universal that everyone agreed on the proposed rules, including the majority of the staff, I'm making the thread now. We as a community ask that everyone abides to these rules to promote healthy democracy in the nominations thread. (This does not apply to any nominations made before this thread)

Rule 1: You must wait three days after a track is released before you are allowed to nominate it. The reason we do this is so people can have time to discuss the track in the original thread. There you may discuss how much it does deserve to be featured and criticize in any constructive way you see fit, assuming it's within community guidelines. This also prevents yes-voting-happy people straight ticket voting, or going straight for the nomination. Some members have been noticing that tracks are being nominated within three minutes of being posted, and that's annoying. Opinions can change over time, and this is to make sure that time happens. Nothing serious will happen if this rule is broken, most that would be rational is the topic being deleted. So please don't vote in any early nominated tracks.

Rule 2: You are only allowed one comment per thread. This is your one and only time you may discuss anything about the track in the nominations thread. You had your chance to talk about your opinions in the original thread, so the posts here should be trimmed down explanations of your vote. Do not direct your posts at anyone who's also posted in the thread, positive or negative. Do not direct your posts at anyone who posted a comment elsewhere. Just don't mention or hint at anyone specific. It can be agreed upon that discussion about these tracks is perfectly fine if it's calm and respectful, but you give everyone an inch, someone will take a mile. If you do feel you need to talk to someone about their posts here, there's a perfectly good chatbox to your right you can use. Violation of this rule can be much more sever depending on how and what you violate. We've already seen what could happen, and it drove two of our members to insanity. This rule is key to keeping these threads a clean place.

Rule 3: Staff decision is final. Don't argue with them. Unless the staff start arguing with themselves, then I have no idea what to do. So no arguing Guest!

Is it okay to reply to people if you agree with them? Also, is this rule permanent? Or will it be removed if it's proven that people can reply normally again?

Personally I think this isn't necassary as we've had everybody voting for quite some time without escalation. Oh well.

It is okay to agree with whole or part of someone else's post. quoting someone and saying "this" or saying "I think this thing, like person x" is okay. Quoting someone and explaining why your opinion differs, or saying "I think this thing, unlike person x" is not.

Yes it is dumb that we have to have this rule. Yes I do hope we won't need it in the future. But I can't promise it will ever be removed at this point.

I've wasted many many hours this week trying to deal with this flame war and the aftermath and everything else. If this hadn't happened I might be done with Driftwood by now. I wish it wasn't necessary. I think we wouldn't have had this problem if there was still a LCC section and the polls weren't public.