Votes on Membership

[Aerick]

Hey, I was thinking about our present voting system, and there is one aspect of it with which I am not comfortable. And that is the option of not giving a reason when voting against admitting someone.

On the off chance that a member opposes am exile for an erroneous reason, we should be able to know that reason, so we could point out and fix the error.

An example would be Farhope's issues with Phiros. Had she not posted her reasons, and simply opposed his entrance to the clan, we would not have had the responce which changed her opinion to the positive.

I don't think people should have the option to keep people out of the clan without giving a reason.

[Aerick]

OK, here is the relevant part of the Membership Policy that I take exception to:

****6a) Voting a member in: Everyone in the clan should vote. Votes should be conducted by E-mail, and should be sent to the secretary-in-charge. The secretary and the membership coordinator should not reveal (or even make a hint at) how any other members voted-if anyone wants to know how other members voted they should ask those members specifically.

-I do agree with this. Individual anonymity will render more honest votes. Discretion is a good thing.

You can feel free to announce how you voted to other members if you choose, but are never under any obligation to do so.*****

-This is where I have an issue. I think that if you vote against a member being joined, you should have to give a reason. The reason can be posted by whoever takes the votes to preserve anonymity, but the reason should be available.

[Lilly]

I felt that requiring a reason for nays was overstepping the bounds of privacy - sometimes people just dont like each other, and dont have any better explanation to share then that. And i dont think they should be forced into giving one. I do see the benefits of doing things Aerick's way, though, and am open to changing it. what are people's thoughts?

[Konoko]

I can see why giving a reason as to why one thinks someone should not join the clan is a good thing.

Discussions can be had to see if the person has changed and stuff...
Perhaps the person voting no will then change her/his mind after the discussion.

Also, the opposite could happen. The reason someone has for someone else not joining could be informatiev or influential to someone else and then there could be more no votes...

I don't see why the reason should not be given as long as it is all anonymous and all that.

[Aerick]

I am familiar with the reasoning to allow for secrecy. I personally disagree with it, as I think that among friends, secrets should not be kept, and in a professional organization, personal feelings aren't an issue (so secrets aren't needed).

But I'm willing to compromise and accept anonymous reasons, provided the reasons are posted, and so can be dealt with. I maintain that everyone SHOULD be willing to publicly disclose their reasons.

[Nunul]

I agree with your last statement Aeric...

"I am familiar with the reasoning to allow for secrecy. I personally disagree with it, as I think that among friends, secrets should not be kept, and in a professional organization, personal feelings aren't an issue (so secrets aren't needed). But I'm willing to compromise and accept anonymous reasons, provided the reasons are posted, and so can be dealt with. I maintain that everyone SHOULD be willing to publicly disclose their reasons. "

The Windy Dorf

[Lilly]

In most cases I am a proponent of giving reasons why a person votes for or against anythying. But there are some things that happen that just arent meant to be other people's business, even if they are friends. I definitely encourage discussion and explanations, but people should still have the option to say that they have personal reasons theyd rather not share.

[GrayGradi]

Well said, Lilly.

[Aerick]

OK, I can see instances where no good would come of providing a reason. I'm still not 100% comfortable with having not a single other person aware of the reasoning, though.