Questions for the FG about the organization of the election

[Ras]

Is this idea from viewtopic.php?p=972079#p972079 ...

Moderator candidates should present a proper CV, education, academic experience, work experience, responsibility positions, achievements.

... off the table for good?

[Ras]

In democratic environments it is a basic tradition that everyone who can vote also has the right to be elected.

It is not. In fact, keeping convicted criminals from assuming positions of political power is common. Just as example, look up the German penal code StGB § 45 (link in German).

Why would you want to shorten the list of potential candidates?

Because putting a fox in charge of the henhouse is an obviously bad idea?

[Viren]

I am also excluded from the voter list yet again. I dont appreciate chrisw endless bullying over my name not being realistic enough. There are children called "X Æ A-Xii", it is not up to the FG to decided whether someone's name fits their cultural standards. He should be ashamed of himself.

You would have a point if your name was really 'Peanut'. OTOH, if your only justification is that it could have been 'Peanut', as you appear to argue here, it would be a charter violation and an attempt to mock the charter, and thus encouraging others to do the same. Even if it were true, people would assume you are mocking the charter, with the same undesirable consequence.

I think the difference is important enough to require some proof before allowing you to create the impression that you are mocking the charter. You would not want to create that impression, right?

Absolutely not! But I also don't want to be forced to hand over proof to vote when others did not have to. That would be quite discriminatory right? Especially to a cultural minority

[chrisw]

Is this idea from viewtopic.php?p=972079#p972079 ...

Moderator candidates should present a proper CV, education, academic experience, work experience, responsibility positions, achievements.

... off the table for good?

If candidates wish to have political power over members then they need, imo, to reveal a little more about themselves than the usual platitudes. A non self-doxing CV as above at least allows voters to make more informed decisions on suitability of potential candidates, so, no, not off the table as far as I’m concerned.

[hgm]

Can we see your papers, sir?

What exactly is in my name that makes you think it people are very likely to draw the conclusion that it must be an attempt to mock anyone/anything?

[hgm]

Absolutely not! But I also don't want to be forced to hand over proof to vote when others did not have to. That would be quite discriminatory right? Especially to a cultural minority

Well, as far as I am concerned this is an issue that transcends the election. This is a name I would frown upon even during registration; I would not immediately have approved it.

[Viren]

Absolutely not! But I also don't want to be forced to hand over proof to vote when others did not have to. That would be quite discriminatory right? Especially to a cultural minority

Well, as far as I am concerned this is an issue that transcends the election. This is a name I would frown upon even during registration; I would not immediately have approved it.

What exactly are you asking for? Should I change it to something more 'realistic' just so it doesn't face this scrutiny? This is ridiculous

[chrisw]

I am also excluded from the voter list yet again. I dont appreciate chrisw endless bullying over my name not being realistic enough. There are children called "X Æ A-Xii", it is not up to the FG to decided whether someone's name fits their cultural standards. He should be ashamed of himself.

You, like one hundred or so others, did not have a real name associated.
During the two weeks grace period, you updated to Viren Peanut. You could have PM-ed (as did other special cases) to preempt us from imagining you were TTP.
Of the many updaters, yours flagged up with an unusual sounding name.
I flagged it at the top of the published listing, together with another seeming unsatisfactory name.
A week or so passed and you said nothing, despite clearly reading the posting and the listing.
I then alerted the other FG guys and said although unusual we could pass it on the basis Peanut could be Chinese or SE Asian or Philippine, maybe.
However, on further investigation we found that your original sign up was by UK based IP. At which point the likelihood that your name was TTP increased rather dramatically.

However, you’re also barred by being banned. Members who received a ban during the previous six months are barred from standing as moderators at the next election. The historical “in good standing” requirement.

Your ban was connected to questioning/denying the right of another member to exist.

[Ras]

If candidates wish to have political power over members then they need, imo, to reveal a little more about themselves than the usual platitudes. A non self-doxing CV as above at least allows voters to make more informed decisions on suitability of potential candidates, so, no, not off the table as far as I’m concerned.

However, that idea is not in current outline in any way: viewtopic.php?t=84561. My question was whether this is just an informal suggestion or an actual requirement. In the latter case, it should be in the outline.

What if all the hens want the fox?

Then they probably should have registered on another platform with a different (back-then) charter in the first place. A charter that allows for more, ahem, discord perhaps?

[hgm]

What exactly are you asking for? Should I change it to something more 'realistic' just so it doesn't face this scrutiny? This is ridiculous

No, I hoped that the scrutiny would not cause any real problem, because there was some easily accessible data that would show you are entirely on the level, and that it is just me suffering from paranoia. But lacking that, I suppose we do have to take your word for it.