I think many of us would agree that there are too many pinned topics at the moment. While it’s a great thing that there’s so much activity (motions) happening, it is a bit difficult to read the forums at the moment.
How does everyone feel about setting a time limit for pinned topics? We have the ability to set a global pin for a set length of time so that posts automatically unpin. For example, every motion could be pinned for 1-2 weeks when it is first put up for voting, and then afterwards it will rely on shareholder comments to stay visible.
What if we manage a “Voting” page on the docs site. People can submit pull requests on the page to add their link when it’s ready to vote, and it gets added to a voting list. Then we just globally sticky one forum post with a link to that voting page and how to add their vote to the list. We could add links to the voting page in the header here, or even the header on the docs page.
if they don’t have enough knowledge to submit a pull request with the link there’s enough technical people around that could do it. It’s actually super easy. You hit the “edit” on the page, make the changes, hit save, hit pull request. and someone can add it in.
I would say put them all in a globally pinned thread here but then only one person can edit it. But if its in the github repo then everyone in the org will be notified when there’s a pull request, and can click a button to merge the changes. We’ll have some better tools soon, but this is another suggestion to throw into the hat until then.
EDIT: actually we could probably do it in a globally pinned locked thread, then admins could add voting urls in it, the same way we’re just pinning threads now. So it would be one thread with a bunch of links to the other threads ready to vote on.
The mods could have permission to edit this thread. Whenever a thread transitions from the draft stage to voting, then a mod would edit the thread body to include it in a list of all the latest motions and grants. The list would be ordered by the date and time voting started, so the newest motion would always be placed at the top of the list in the OP. Every time a new motion or grant is added, it would push the older ones down in the list. If a motion or grant passes, then it should be removed from the list. We should also have a cutoff date for removing motions or grants from the thread that don’t pass by a certain time frame. A cutoff date for passage would prevent the thread from being filled up with motions that don’t get passed, so only current and relevant motions would remain. The title of the thread would also be edited, notifying shareholders of a new addition to the list. This could be done by adding a “Last Updated - Date” section to the title. Here is an example…
Title: Latest Motions & Grants Currently Being Voted on - List Updated on 09/23/15
I’m actually against having a cutoff date. I’m fine with ordering votes by date and even giving moderators ultimate discretion over what constitutes spam or abuse of the voting page. However, I don’t think a motion should go away unless either the motion is withdrawn or there is no contest from the forum. I’d be ok with giving it a time frame like a month at the end of which the mods will post a question in the motion thread about if the motion still has support from the forum. If yes, give it another month and repeat. If no, let it die. Anyone at all can respond to continue the timer.
How about if we had 2 lists then? The OP would contain a list of motions and grants that started voting within the last month. After 1 month has passed, the motion in question would get removed from the first post and added to another list in the 2nd post. All motions that don’t get passed or withdrawn would stay in this 2nd list, while the OP only contained the most relevant motions and grants within the last 31 days that haven’t been passed yet. How does that sound?
Also, I imagine this would only be temporary until a more permanent solution is put in place on NuBits.com.
I’m ok with a hot list and a cold list. The hot list should list the highest voted stuff at the top, like is done on our block explorer. The cold list should list newest entries at the top. Each entry should contain:
Motion Hash or Grant address and amount
Current Support (10,000 block average)
Title of relevant post as hyperlink to forum
Short description (<500 characters)
Mods reserve the right to delete a forum post. However, any forum post that is not deleted should be put in the hot list as soon as possible. Descriptions should come from the vote poster, if possible. Any forum member that complains about a description of a hash or grant that they proposed should be given the benefit of the doubt and the mods should do their absolute damnedest to avoid censorship. It would be a poor situation where a forum member posts a legitimate hash to vote on but insists on a vulgar or otherwise inappropriate description. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen, or that it is not severe enough that we can simply give the poster the benefit of the doubt.
This is a very very important topic, in my opinion, as humans are unpredictable creatures and active conscious thought from voters in our network is crucial. We need to strive to make an even and easily accessible playing field for both those posting the hash and the voters who need to read and process it.