« first day (1273 days earlier)      last day (481 days later) » 

5:11 PM
@DanielFischer FYI: I've added you and @quid as room owners in this temporary chat room. Also, I'm sure the "room's purpose" can be tweaked.
@DanielFischer and @quid I know as mods, you have chat room access, the same as being a room owner, and more. I just felt "lonely" being the only room owner! :-)
Of course, @DanielFischer and @quid, if you object to being listed as room owners, I'll totally respect that too.
 
5:35 PM
Thanks for the initiative and for letting me know @amWhy . I'll check it out later.
 
All I've done thus far, @quid, was create the room, give a tentative description of it, and added links to three specifically-election-related-pages, which I will update, as needed.
 
 
3 hours later…
8:10 PM
CM's switching bait, a week after announcing last week that users could begin posting their "self-nomination" declaration of candidacy today, have edited out this statement into oblivion so that today, if one comes to that linked post to see if any eager beavers how announced candidacy, one reads that nomination phase begins in two weeks from today.
Haven't the CM's gotten elections down-pat by now?
 
@AsafKaragila CMs have agreed to delay the election
 
Thanks @Alexander, you didn't bother to answer my comment, but only bother to let Asaf know his wish was granted? Who do you represent as a moderator, after all, @AlexanderGruber
 
Thanks for bringing those problems to the attention of the community; hopefully this will improve things a bit.
 
Thanks for ignoring me yet again, dear @AlexanderGruber. I see I'm not included among those whose opinions count. So, what, do you only count other mods, and maybe three "regular" users' opinions as warranting action?
@Alex I really am quite sick over how one or to MSE users can influence the mod team to intervene and solicit CM's on those user's behalf, but won't so much as reply to some other user's comment, when addressed.
 
8:34 PM
I get it. When a mod doesn't want to answer a legitimate question, they pretend they haven't seen it (it's called being "selective blindness"), pretty much my point here in my former two comments. @AlexanderGruber if you choose to be "selectively blind" to many users's perspectives, but "wide-eyed" under a microscope of one single user's frustration, maybe consider whether you think that a good moderator makes.
I think that the election should have been announced earlier, just like Asaf did!! But that should have been announced last week July 9th, along with a notification for users to think of good questions to ask of moderators, so they can post them on July 16th. Then nominations on July 23.... etc. Once they embarked upon their plan as officially posted on July 9th, as well as articulating the game plan, with dates, I think the damage was done, and won't be undone by confusing countless users
to try and undo a mistake that really can't be undone, in all fairness. If users cannot rely upon any current week's election agenda, you are undermining equal opportunity, fairness, being above board, and not changing the rules of the game, after the game has already begun.
@AlexanderGruber Can you pretty much assure me that official nominations will begin July 30th, because I and many other felt pretty much assured that would be happening today. A mod even created an unofficial nomination page on meta, to nominate other users (which will have been around 2.5 weeks by the official nomination). I created a 2018 moderator election chat room, so it would not be too early, but would coincide roughly with nominations. You didn't consider the momentum already built,
...But only tried to satisfy one disgruntled users, among, how many? Sure, selective blindness, again. No matter the time and energy already spent by users hurrying to ask potential candidates, in a page to "unofficially" nominate another user, a chat-room, and potential candidate's energy already invested in preparing candidate statements for today, or during this upcoming week.
 
8:55 PM
@amWhy it is actually possible to ignore a user on chat (unlike the rest of the network) - perhaps Alexander has actually done that.
...actually I see he is a mod so that must be unlikely
 
@RobertFrost No mod should do that. I know all about "ignoring", and he could have only chosen to do so after not wanting to face my initial question. I doubt mods use that feature much; I think there are ethical considerations that would make the use of "ignoring" by mods very contestable, making the issue one that needs to be brought to SE staff. Ignore almost all regular users, but have a magnifying lens to see each and every word from one user, whose friendship they want so badly.
 
Yeah, I realised that after I posted. I think more likely he doesn't know what the best answer is and has better things to be concerned with.
 
9:13 PM
@DanielFischer I guess Alexander doesn't find be to be worth answering. The selectivity of who he considers his clients (a favored few) is reminiscent my experience under ArthurFischer's well known abuse of me.
I've removed my proposed questions from the collection of questions for the questionnaire, and I ask that the chat room I created earlier today, on the presupposition that the nomination phase would begin today, deleted too.
I've been planning to stick around until after the election, and it had temporarily, this past week, re-energized me. and as you can see, I've been very active in that process. But I really do get angry when some users have have power over some moderator actions, and every word those users utter is heard and savored, while most users go ignored by the same mod(s).
 
@amWhy I was initially against the delay, for more-or-less, the reasons you gave. I then gave in on the grounds that maybe it is less of a problem for "my" side. Be assured that the community team as well as the mod team is very aware of risks involved in this. I really cannot imagine that there will be further delays.
 
@quid I appreciate your time and effort to answer me here. Unfortunately, what the site mods may have failed to consider as a risk, is the loss of trust in any reliability, maybe even authenticity of any election at this point in time, as no users here were notified explicitly, or received any explanation for, the change of date now posted on the "2018 Moderator Election Q&A" post, and still have yet to do so, so that befuddled users can better understand "what? I thought it was today?"
 
@amWhy - please rest assured this was not done on a whim. The mod team and I discussed it at length this morning; the delay recognizes several people's concerns that folks have had insufficient time to prepare in the past. We're trying this as an experiment to see if running the question collection and unofficial nomination threads for a longer period of time proves useful to the community; the election itself will go as planned, just two weeks later than originally scheduled.
 
@Shog9 I'm not a happy camper here right now. First to error in not pre-anouncing the election, then after users came to prepare for today, you all make the error of calling a "do over"!?
 
@amWhy we never pre-announce elections beyond the posting of the question collection thread.
 
9:28 PM
@amWhy yes it is not ideal, but there is at least a quotebox that say "update" so the change is made transparent.
 
I'm not sure why folks were expecting that this time around, but... Quite honestly, that was the biggest motivation for pushing out the start of the actual election.
 
@Shog9 Well, then one week ago, two weeks should have been allowed for question collections, and the date for nominations been set for July 23, of July 30th, (the latter of which risks the loss of any "steam" by many active users eager to contribute.) But to post it, officially, and schedule the nomination phase for today, and only to change that day, today, to another day, is not what I would consider, respectful of all users in the community.
 
@amWhy again, this is the first time that I'm aware of any complaints being raised over question collection not being posted farther than a week in advance.
We're trying to be sensitive to those concerns, but... I don't see how we could've anticipated them.
 
@Shog9 I think users here, when the rug is pulled out like it was today, deserve the explanation you gave to me.
 
@amWhy feel free to post your concerns on meta and I'll respond there as I did here.
 
9:37 PM
@Shog9 Yes, and you're being especially sensitive to one very vocal, high-rep user who buddies up with as many mods as they can, even literally, over beer, and importantly complained and @AlexanderGruber (diamond) set out from there to disrupt the election based on that one user's complaint; and perhaps one user who posted on meta yesterday. I don't see you all being sensitive to the folks that are disrupted by this sudden delay. That's likely my biggest concern in all of this.
 
@amWhy you misunderstand; I'm here because this is where you posted your concerns. I haven't seen any concerns elsewhere in chat, or on meta.
If there are other folks upset about this, you'd do them a service by posting your concerns in a place where they could more easily express their agreement.
 
@Shog9 I'm not going to voice my concerns because I value consistency, so why in the heck would I push for, say, July23 rd, to risk changing the schedule yet again? Even so, I do not trust the mod/CM teams to take any complaint from me any where near as seriously as the privileged one.
 
@amWhy I can't parse that last sentence
 
In any case, I plan not to invest in this election any further, after having been led (misled) after only one week.
@Shog9 It's visible in the transcript above where Alexander Grubner announces specifically to one user, the Primary Person Complaining, that the election has been pushed back. Yet, he failed to address even one comment from me. That happened to me under another mod, no longer here. I'm sorry, but it seems like one particular user has more clout on this site than any other user.
 
@amWhy to be fair, neither you nor anyone else posted an answer or comment in response to my complaint saying, “actually, please dont change the election timeline! Here’s why: ...”
 
9:48 PM
Anyway, @Shog9 I appreciate you stopping in to discuss this. I'm quite exhaused right now, and hungry. So I really have nothing more to say at this time. I've said it earlier today. It is what it is, at least for the next week.
 
@amWhy ok; Asaf's concerns were about participating in the last election. This change in schedule is not going to do anything for that. If last year's pattern holds, it's actually going to put it ending during one of the quietest times of year, usage-wise.
enjoy your meal!
 
@user7530 well, I did say.
Personally I am against an election right now too, so... But, let's see how it goes. For now the part that most people care about did not really start. I am not sure extending the deadline for nomination would help all that much. In practice it's often that users wait and see. And then it depends on the dynamic of the situation. Some complained that in the last election there were few candidates for example, but then there were several competitive candidate in since early on which likely discouraged some nominations. In contrast in some other elections the 'strong' ones joined late. — quid ♦ 2 days ago
Especially "I am not sure extending the deadline for nomination would help all that much."
You can also read some critical comments above.
Anyway, as said, I gave in. In that sense I "own" my share of the decision to delay. Yet for the record it is not true that no one said anything.
 
Fair enough, but “I’m not sure extending the deadline would help” != “I am opposed to changing the deadline”
As I mentioned in the other chat room, I don’t think translating the election timeline by two weeks is useful on its own unless there is also community notification
On the other hand, I struggle to see the harm, and certainly there wasn’t much strong opposition to the idea in my meta thread.
 
10:05 PM
@user7530 I had not seen your earlier post, else I would have surely commented, at the very least, in support! Just goes to show, @Shog9, @AlexanderGruber, that there is at least one "privileged" non-mod user who can whisper a request, and it's handled, no questions asked. Another reg user like you or me can go unnoticed, possibly even, despite having been vocal about a concern.
 
eh... I kinda asked a lot of questions.
regardless of who originally prompted this discussion, it involved rather a lot of people before anything happened.
 
10:17 PM
It is what it is, hey, @Shog9? At least from what I now read today. I've already withdrawn two questions I proposed for some intangible questionnaire that might, unless the schedule changes yet again, be available for those who declare candidacy to answer come two weeks?, over the course of one week?, unless that schedule is changed too, so that first ballots can be cast, perhaps on Aug. 13th. Can I insist that the election be concluded before September 2018?
 
I don't know where you're getting this idea that we're gonna make a habit of changing the schedule here.
We changed it once; that already took a big chunk out of my Monday. I'm in no hurry to mess with it again.
 
@Shog9 I'm sorry; this election has last my trust, @Shog9. You can't blame me for being rather tweaked about this sudden change of affairs, less than two hours before user could begin to nominate themselves, oops sorry, you gotta wait two more weeks. No, I'm not running. But don't blame me for questioning what I consider to be a significant disruption in the election process. I did comment to Grace Note about the sudden edit of July 16 to July 30, short of any other change whatsoever
 
I'm not blaming you, I just don't know where you're coming from on this.
 
Read the discussion again, @Shog9, or let it go. What's done is done. I'm not so grandiose as to demand you or the mods convince you and other CM's to reverse the schedule to what it was. The damage is already done. And only more damage would be done to switch gears. Some of us care about what's best for the community. That's all.
 
10:52 PM
@amWhy Alexander Gruber sometimes moderates from his phone and doesn't see things right away. No faith in me after all these years, huh.
Nobody has any intentions of delaying the election further. We discussed whether or not the delay should have been greater when implementing this one, and decided it shouldn't be.
Sorry that you feel the momentum has been broken-- I think you should keep the chat room up. I would expect that and the nominations thread to be active during this extra time.
 
11:10 PM
@AlexanderGruber I still have faith in you, @AlexanderGruber; and I'm sorry if I was being impatient.
 
@amWhy Thanks for saying so, and no harm done.
 
@AlexanderGruber I'd still appreciate some of my questions to you addressed.
 
@amWhy I was trying to with the above.
What else is it that you'd like to know?
 
Okay. Everyone take it easy.
@amWhy: This is not the first time I see you claim that the moderators have some sort of favoritism towards me. And maybe it's true. But maybe also I make good arguments? Maybe it's about the things I've seen and done that put in a slight more convincing position, that lets me have a bit more leeway that ultimate make my arguments slightly more convincing? You are not privy to the times that moderators say no to my requests or my suggestions. These are often done through flagging.
I don't appreciate being singled out as some sort of an elevated status. I don't have that. My shit is crap. Just like anyone else's.
@AlexanderGruber: Thank you for letting me know.
@Shog9: I am aware that this might still end up being a low-key election. Yes, summer is a bad time for an election, and as far as I can tell, it's a generally terrible time to have an election (as I mentioned before). But as far as people who actually care about how the site is run, it might actually make a slight difference.
For me it's not about how many people visited the site/how many people voted. It's more about how many people follow meta/how many people voted.
Or maybe how many people voted/how many of them follow meta.
The thing is that meta users are often active through summer breaks too. So if anything, the signal-to-noise ratio is going to be better this time.
@amWhy: In any case, I hope you rethink your de-participation from the election threads.
 
11:31 PM
@AsafKaragila No worries, Asaf. We're all a bunch of Fonzies here.
 
@AlexanderGruber That was a mild reference to the second season of Fargo, but okay. :P
 
@AsafKaragila it was supposed to be pulp fiction!
 
@AsafKaragila Of course you don't want to be singled out, and of course you think your among The Very Few who think you're particularly worth (one of the few who provide good arguments, you say?). I saw you ask Alexander to run this by the CMs. I saw Alexander agree with you to do so... all around the same time as you sharing with Alexander and others about having a beer with Arthur Fischer (again). That looks an awful like personal favoritism, as you had with Arthur.
 
@AlexanderGruber No no no, it's when Lou Solverson and Ben Schmidt visit the Gerhardt farm.
@amWhy You are aware that at this point Arthur had not visited the site for over six months, right?
 
@AsafKaragila Wrong. Those who actually care have already been aware of the election. And some of those investing an awful lot of time in encouraging potential candidates, suggesting questions, starting a chatroom for the nomination phase which was supposed to happen today, may be soooooo done with the election, two weeks from now, when then should be happening now. You have also succeeded in confusing users, as well as put the very candidate you unofficially nominated ...
... on the hot seat for three straight weeks. That can actually undermine his candidacy.
 
11:38 PM
@amWhy Well. I guess we have to wait and see. Do you prefer if there was another announcement that things are back to normal?
 
@AsafKaragila I know that. It's just a matter of deja vu, with alexander as an Arthur replacement. Your also aware of how much Arthur hated me.
 
@amwhy Well that should certainly separate me from an Arthur replacement, among many other things. I do not hate you (not that Arthur did, at least to my knowledge)
 
Of course, @Asaf. You got what you wanted. Relish in that for now.
 
@amWhy You really have no intention of having a conversation, and I am too tired from drinking and walking a full hour from the city back to my room to be your proverbial punching back at the moment.
@amWhy ...
Seriously?
 
@AsafKaragila I've deleted the comment, @Asaf. My problem is not with you.
 
11:42 PM
@quid Thank you for the feedback. In all honesty, I was probably asking a more general question about the way that the site works, and it probably was not appropriate to ask that particular question in that particular context.
 
@AsafKaragila Yes, I do want a a serious and honest conversation.
 
@amWhy Since it's not the first time you make these sort of claims, it's kind of hard to take you at face value.
Good night. Or whatever time of day it is in your slice of world.
 
@XanderHenderson you are welcome. We could discuss about this another time.
 
@AsafKaragila Seriously? Are you denying that Arthur didn't favorite you?
 
Anyhow, if you want me to affirm it explicitly, there isn't any favoritism going on between me and Asaf (or any other user). I agreed with what he said and took it to the mods with a few of my own additions.
 
11:47 PM
@AlexanderGruber Thanks for replying. The biggest difference I see with you is that I've had absolutely no reason to think you "hate" me, nor any reason to think you "disfavor" me.
 
@amwhy I try to be as impartial as possible as a moderator. Even without that, though, I don't hate anybody, and see you as a valuable editor here
@amwhy Btw, there are some flags to undelete your mod questionnaire questions. I'll leave it to you to decide when/if to do so, just wanted to let you know people want them
 
@AlexanderGruber Anyone who wants to post those questions. They're both from the 2017 election, as I noted in each post. They'll likely garner more "upvotes" without my name attached to them. (The last sentence: That's just an honest statement I clearly recognize and experience daily, at this point in time, on this site. That's not about poor self esteem on my part. It's been my reality this past eight months.)
 

« first day (1273 days earlier)      last day (481 days later) »