Sunday, June 22, 2008

The Next Step

In the recent vote we had in Blogpower, regarding putting a limit on the number of members, the decision in favour of doing so was passed by a slim majority of one vote. With that in mind the three of us have looked at the situation and since the membership had been as high as 70 at one time, in fact the heading of the blogroll in the sidebar says "We happy close to six dozen", and we all dealt with it satisfactorily, we have decided to make this the new limit. In addition 22 out of the 37 who voted wanted either 70 or more or no limit so we feel this number will be acceptable to the majority.

Currently we have 56 members on the blogroll, so we will be accepting new members once again. During the voting procedure we had an application from a former member to rejoin and a new application for membership from a writer/editor who is a former editor of the New Statesman, who may be of interest to many among us. We will contact them now and confirm that they wish to proceed and will be asking you to vote on them as soon as we hear.

JMB Ian Grey Colin Campbell


Matt M said...

I still think it might be worth looking into the various polling widgets available - as it would save admins having to deal with all the votes themselves.

Blogger does have one - but I think it only limits you to one vote per day rather than one vote overall.

Although maybe we should think about switching to a more petition-like system: If someone objects to a certain blog being part of BP then the burden could be on them to get a certain number of bloggers to object and provide a list to the admins, etc. The admins would then simply have to ensure that the list provided has the necessary number of names (and maybe email a few of them at random to ensure that they did consent to having their name included).

This assumes votes should be private. If all voting was open then it would simply be necessary for a blogger to publish a list of names objecting.

The admins, rather than having to deal with all aspects of votes, would simply be required to keep an eye on things and ensure it's all above board.

Matt M said...

Maybe this would help when getting votes:

(The vote-once-a-year option would stop multiple votes by the same person (90% of the time))

Colin Campbell said...


I agree with what you are saying and we will definitely be using something like this going forward for more contentious votes. On votes for membership on the list it is good to hear what people think and why.

Yahoo Groups has a poll facility that can meet what we need. Only members of the group can vote and only once, which is the most important criteria.

Should we have a vote on the type of polling software we use? :)

Matt M said...

On votes for membership on the list it is good to hear what people think and why.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to keep some BP members from expressing their opinions, no matter what software you use. :-)

The key to this has to be simplicity - if BP becomes too much hassle then people will be put off joining or maintaining their membership. During both the James/CBI and David/CBI sagas we lost members. Some because they agreed with James and David, but others, I think, because they didn't sign up for that kind of internal political issue and felt they were being dragged into it.

As I see it, BP can go in two directions: We can focus on being a small, active group, or we can become a larger, more laissez-faire group.

At the moment, we seem to be torn in both directions.

Colin Campbell said...

No we are not.
Yes we are
No we are not.
Yes we are.........................

Baht At said...

BTW I've just remembered I happen to own the domains and

since you didn't bother asking for them I've now changed to forwarding to one of my choosing.

Incidently how does 15 out of 56 make a majority and since the members voted for a limit of 50 how come you are over-ruling them?