The New World Order of the Badlands

[Dual]

hahaha someone's angry.

you didn't answer my man Big Sexy's question, will you get the fuck off if we get on the citizen's list?

I believe I've made my stance perfectly clear. If, hypothetically, you achieved citizenship, I would proceed to take it from you. It is rather moot, however, as nobody would vouch for you, and on the off chance that somebody did, I could simply veto and block your applications.

 

[aeommai]

interesting.

oh well, we'll just have to find other ways of taking you out of power.

 

[Ilyanna]

I believe I've made my stance perfectly clear. If, hypothetically, you achieved citizenship, I would proceed to take it from you. It is rather moot, however, as nobody would vouch for you, and on the off chance that somebody did, I could simply veto and block your applications.

I am 100% in accordance with you in this matter!

 

[Scott Hall]

ey yo mang it's okay, you can't handle us but we guide you in slow mang, so you get used to the cool chica.

 

[Ilyanna]

 

[classichummus]

I'm against 3D, 5, 6, 7, and 17.

I think instead of a "permanent mod" we should have an "annual mod," a mod who is elected at the beginning of each year and stays until the end of that year. That position can only be held by accounts/citizens who have been active (meaning an account that is used frequently) for 1 year or more. I would say an account like Omar who doesn't post frequently couldn't hold the post of the "annual mod." It doesn't necessarily have to be held by a main account. If Love Child didn't want to use her main account for it and chose to use I Love Cunt, that would be acceptable. This mod would be elected by the citizens, but missmanners would have to publicly announce that she finds the elected account worthy of this title. This mod would also not be as restricted as the temporary mods. Another restriction is this mod would have to already have served 1 full term as a temporary mod, giving the mod previous experience. The "annual mod" would also not be allowed to be held by an account more than once. Furthermore, Ily would be allowed to finish out 2009. Then we would elect the new "annual mod."
Thoughts?

 

[Ilyanna]

I think instead of a "permanent mod" we should have an "annual mod," a mod who is elected at the beginning of each year and stays until the end of that year.

OK, for the purpose of this discussion, let's pretend that I would voluntarily part with my 'powers'...

That position can only be held by accounts/citizens who have been active (meaning an account that is used frequently) for 1 year or more.

What is a frequent use of an account? It's all good and well to take for granted that we all instinctively know that, but pls don't forget that there are bad, nasty rules trolls out there who are just waiting for an ambiguity like that. (Yeah, trolls. On a troll board. I know it is inconceivable, but hey, so is the fact that bumblebees can fly. It's nature, what can you do?).

I would say an account like Omar who doesn't post frequently couldn't hold the post of the "annual mod." It doesn't necessarily have to be held by a main account. If Love Child didn't want to use her main account for it and chose to use I Love Cunt, that would be acceptable.

Good example, but see above - if you don't close the loopholes, you'll find yourself discussing this stuff ad nauseam for the rest of your life... believe me, I know what I'm talking about...

This mod would be elected by the citizens, but missmanners would have to publicly announce that she finds the elected account worthy of this title.

Where's the difference to the current system? What constitutes a 'Citizen', do you want to keep the citizen's list? And if yes, how and on what conditions would you add/remove people from said list?

This mod would also not be as restricted as the temporary mods.

A world of no. If any, I would even further the boundaries of what a mod may do. I want as much freedom as possible, which basically means: if you want to mod something, ask for permission from the people involved first. Apart from a flood-control now and then, there really isn't much to do. (btw, to the best of my knowledge, the the temp mods are supposed to have the same rights as the permanent one)

Another restriction is this mod would have to already have served 1 full term as a temporary mod, giving the mod previous experience.

Now, that's highly unfair to those who just haven't gotten around to serve their time as mod, and it would restrict the eligible candidates to only a handful of people.

The "annual mod" would also not be allowed to be held by an account more than once.

Why is that? What if we elect a mod and s/he turns out to be the best and most beloved mod of all times? Why should we unnecessarily restrict ourselves like that?

Furthermore, Ily would be allowed to finish out 2009. Then we would elect the new "annual mod."

As I said - if I'd be willing to quit my dictatorship-for-life job, this would be a good suggestion

 

[classichummus]

Those limitations are just thoughts now, they can be changed if people feel necessary.

 

[FBI parte due]

If anyone wants an honest opinion, I think that any constitution that goes beyond the ten-point mark is a pretty serious attack on people's ability to care about rules on a message board.

I'm not insulting the current Spamstitution, which is really well thought-out, especially for a board full of rule trolls with the emotional temperaments of a twelve-year-old girl. It's going to be hard to take seriously, though, as long as it's basically a set of rules for choosing which of your friends you want randomly locking and merging threads in the Badlands next.

 

[FBI parte due]

I just like telling people I'm right and they're wrong, honestly.

 

[Yub]

.

I say we rid ourselves of the Spamstitution, the citizen's list and once every six months, people argue their case before Ily. One mod to serve beneath Ily every six months, based on their merits not how many duals they can squeeze onto the citizen's list.

 

[aeommai]

the main problem with your system is that you guys let dual accounts count as seperate citizens, i remember mm pointing out one that love child or love cunt or something to do with LC were tied with someone and suddenly she popped out two dual accounts and won.

that's ridiculous, if you give each member one vote, then you can have a proper system, and if someone manages to create a dual account so well that it fools everyone, and then that dual account should be a citizen too.

then again im just a retard troll so you can do whatever you want.

 

[Yub]

Wow. You're finally seeing the light. You are just a retard troll.

 

[OS@M@'s Dick]

the main problem with your system is that you guys let dual accounts count as seperate citizens, i remember mm pointing out one that love child or love cunt or something to do with LC were tied with someone and suddenly she popped out two dual accounts and won.

that's ridiculous, if you give each member one vote, then you can have a proper system, and if someone manages to create a dual account so well that it fools everyone, and then that dual account should be a citizen too.

then again im just a retard troll so you can do whatever you want.

CUNTY

 

[Conchaga]

...I wanna change it. Suggestions are:

Spamstitution(revised):
We, the citizens of the Badlands, declare this Spamstitution law. These are the guidelines for the selection of the citizens and moderators within this forum.

Sounds good, needed clarification.

1. There is a master list of those who are citizens ('Citizen's List) and this list may only be updated by missmanners or the current moderators.

2. redundant

Yes it was redundant, but it was necessary. Perhaps it should read like this?

1. There is a master list of those who are citizens and this list may only be updated by missmanners or the current moderators.
A) Those members who are on the master list of citizens are the only citizens. No exceptions.

The added and somewhat redundant verbiage is to prevent loopholes.

3. New citizens may be added before the next election.
A) Only valid and current citizens may nominate another poster for citizenship.

Agreed, clarification is good.

C) Citizens added between elections have no vouchers to add other citizens until the completion of the current moderator election

Again, agreed, clarification is good.

D) A minimum of three citizens may petition to overturn a nomination for a new citizen. The decision ('Citizenship Vote') will be made by the current moderators. The decision has to be made unanimously within one week. Any discussion between the moderators pertaining to the nomination of a new citizen has to be made in public. If after said week there is no consent reached, the nomination counts as overturned.

No. It removes the ability of the public to hate on a single person and gives too much voting power to the mods. Also, getting more than one person in this forum to agree completely on one thing is next to impossible. Getting three elected people to agree unanimously is astronomically impossible. So, just plain N O.

G) Citizenship Votes will be held seven days prior to every second election.

See above. No.

H) Once a new citizen has been added to the official list of citizens, they can only be removed in adherence of the procedure as given in §5.

This is more of a footnote than an actual statement, nix'd.

5. Those citizens who emigrate from the Badlands can be stricken from the list of grandfathered citizens [strike]by a majority yes/no vote.[/strike]The decision ('Emigration Vote')will be made by the current moderators. The decision has to be made unanimously within one week. Any discussion between the moderators pertaining to the emigration of a citizen has to be made in public. If after said week there is no consent reached, the nomination counts as overturned.

Again, this gives too much power to the mods and will also cause a standstill in decisions. Majority votes by the badlanders themselves works MUCH better than a unanimous vote by mods.

C) Each citizen may only nominate one citizen to be stricken from the Citizen's List every other election.

Again, no. It doesn't allow for the expeditious removal of unused accounts.

E) A minimum of three citizens may petition to overturn a nomination for an Emigration. The decision ('Emigration Vote') will be made by the current moderators. The decision has to be made unanimously within one week. Any discussion between the moderators pertaining to the nomination of a new citizen has to be made in public. If after said week there is no consent reached, the nomination counts as overturned.

Standstills are not a good thing. Nothing will be accomplished and one person with three accounts can abuse the living shit out of this. Essentially, nobody would ever be removed from the citizens list.

6. There will be one permanent and two temporary Badlands Moderators at any given time.
7. The permanent moderator is appointed by missmanners. The term of office for the permanent moderator will be as long as missmanners dictates or until the person holding said office resigns.

These are additions to the existing rules and should be amended to an existing rule or added near the bottom of the list.

17. The Badlands moderators will dictate the policies and rules of the Badlands. In order to pass, change, or delete a policy or rule of the Badlands ('Change of Rules'), all three moderators have to publicly vote for/against said Change of Rules. The decision has to be made unanimously. If after one week, consent has not been reached, the Change of Rules counts as rejected.

See Article 20:

20. We (meaning the public of the Badlands, not the mods or admins) withhold the right to amend this Spamstitution at a later date, should the need arise.

There's my two cents.

If you want to talk about how certain things can be streamlined, I'll be happy to participate. If you want this republic turned into an empirical serfdom, you can count me out.

 

[Ilyanna]

I agree.

Oh and regarding the amendments...
I've changed my mind. Please disregard what I said upthread. The only amendment I would like to make and being voted on is the following:

17. The Badlands moderators may not dictate any policies or rules of the Badlands. Their sole power lies in the sticking and unsticking of threads if the thread starter agrees with it, the merging and unmerging of Floods (to be defined), the editing of posts that clearly go against TK rules, and the closing and opening of threads upon demand of the thread starter.

That should take care of any power struggles, doubts or other causes of fear the Badlands' posters might have regarding moderation.

he, Conchaga, I already changed my mind. In fact, I want to limit the powers the mods have, not expand them. I don't like the fact that with the current wording, the Spamstitution actually allows me or Dual or Gonad to do what we want to do, so we should definitely take a closer look at the following clauses:

16. The Badlands moderators will dictate the policies and rules of the Badlands.

19. We withhold the right to amend this Spamstitution at a later date, should the need arise.

 

[Gagh]

Scrap this fucking shit, and just get back to posting already.

 

[Ilyanna]

 

[missmanners]

How do I make those nWo persons citizens?

I'm sure theres a way. Some cheating maybe?


mm

 

[Kevin Nash]

[nWo] THATS RIGHT WE'RE BACK

All right well seeing as Hollywood wants to make some notes for Psych, the rest of the gang will be logging in and taking establishing a base.

Here's what we'll be doing, as written by Big Sexy:

Since we're not citizens, because dual's a mega faggot, we'll be posting and ignoring the spamstitution, and the rules of the badlands, if there are any, this place is going to be even more no holds barred from now on, Because all you idiots are getting soft, and I don't mean ALL you people, just some of them.

Next up is the new rules, if we, the nWo, EVER, and I mean EVER get into power, there'll be big changes, surprises, and alot less idiots, because dual will leave when it happens. And let me say this dual, we'll be happy to see you go. I'll be sure to send you an E-card when I get the chance.

As I post, the nWo outnumber the active users on this site.

Why don't you Badlanders just bow to the inevitable, Our President is already practically the owner here.