No.8729
This is how we unionise the board:
Okay, so basically this is the gestalt official proposal, I was going to write a document with all the ins and outs of my reasoning, for that, you can go back through this chat and read what I have to say. Essentially, my belief is this: 1) there is somewhat of a consensus among mods and regular attendees to mod related discussions that some form of board democratisation is favourable 2) there are numerous different beliefs on what that should be or what it will look like 3) there is fairly wide consensus that the system of moderation decision making currently in place is not fit for purpose. 4) there is also a fairly wide consensus that, although democratisation is favourable to basically all, most recognise to a great or lesser degree real issues, among these, how can we prevent the subversion of such a system. 4) this leaves us in a position that, we must widen the scope of the decision making process on the board, I.e, democratise it, add more voices to the pool of those eligible to vote, while also making sure that pool does not become subverted with bad faith actors.
My proposal therefore aims precisely to target these concerns, in order to complete the above objective of democratisation to some degree.
While the ideal situation would be in my opinion direct democracy, there are very real threats to this, and very real problems with its implementation. Therefore, I suggest measures in order to smooth over implementation issues in a gradual, increasingly democratic fashion.
Thus, in practical terms, I would like the mods to vote on these 3 separate but cohesive proposals 1) that a union of posters be allowed to created by the posters, this union will act as the mechanism by which posters can discuss issues with the board. It will be owned by the posters, so that it’s independence from the moderation team can be assured. Initially, this union would be a place of discussion, and the will of the board discerned by the individuals who made up the voting body of the union. These individuals would be, those collections of posters who are currently engaged in the board moderation and have been long term. Gradually, more and more people would be added to the voting pool long term, it would be the specific job of these individuals to oversee this expansion. 2) in order to solidify this, myself and soy noticer (the initial inspectorate) be inducted in the mod chat, which would give us voting rights but no mod powers. This way, through the above mentioned Union, gradually more posters, judged good faith by said inspectorate, based on their participation in union discussion, could be added to the inspectorate voting pool and therefore the democratic process of the board. 3) I suggest that this action, if voted for by a majority of the mod team, would represent a binding mandate to enter into a gradual, good faith, long term process of board democratisation as described above.
*This might be sloppy I meant to write this from a laptop but needs must. I have thought through things like the constitution of the union etc