Second Life Forums Archive - Stop recall election spam, require a reason

Kathmandu Gilman

Fearful Symmetry Baby!

Join date: 21 May 2004

Posts: 1,418

03-21-2005 11:14

It has been a long running problem with groups in SL that is very, very annoying. It is the ability for anyone in the group to initiate a recall election for a group officer. This can be a good thing in rare instances but dag nabbit, it is a needless form of spamming and griefing as it can be initiated anonomously and without a stated reason. I don't know how many times I have had these silly recall messages, how often I have to contact the other members of the group to find out if there is a real reason. I have yet to have a legitimate election out of the dozens I have recieved.

Can we at least have a requirement that a reason "MUST" be given or a contact person or website that explains why the election was called before it is ever put up for vote? As it stands now, you either have a griefer giggling in the corner, some sort of bug or some newbie randomly pushing buttons.

Jillian Callahan

Rotary-winged Neko Girl

Join date: 24 Jun 2004

Posts: 3,766

03-21-2005 11:20

Yes, please!

_____________________

Jeffrey Gomez

Cubed™

Join date: 11 Jun 2004

Posts: 3,522

03-21-2005 23:30

I agree with this assessment. It's a moot problem, but I do hate getting "recall election" spam to my Inbox when I'm offline. I could care less about them.

_____________________

---

Prokofy Neva

Virtualtor

Join date: 28 Sep 2004

Posts: 3,698

03-22-2005 00:26

I don't know what dope-smoking hippie tie-dyed idiot invented this socialist fake people's democracy bullshit, but it should be ENTIRELY REMOVED. It is only use to harass legitimate property owners, people who PAY for land that groups own. The rank-and-file members who did NOT PAY should not have the right to REMOVE A PERSON FROM HIS LAND for crying out loud. Junk this, immediately. It's an abomination.

_____________________

Rent stalls and walls for $25-$50/week 25-50 prims from Ravenglass Rentals, the mall alternative.

Roberta Dalek

Probably trouble

Join date: 21 Oct 2004

Posts: 1,174

03-22-2005 02:57

This happens a lot of vendor groups - some starts a recall election against, say, the key officer, and no-one can join the group until it's over.

This is being used for griefing currently.

Maybe there needs to be a way of making non-democratic groups?

Even in cases where the recall of an officer is justified the rules don't really work. If a reason was given for the recall only members who were logged on at the time would see it - groups can't really have debates with the current tools as offline group messages are not saved. FWIW I think this is a good thing as I don't want my IM limit to be reached with lots of events spam.

If we are talking about re-doing groups then there needs to be an option for non-secret voting on proposals. Secret voting is stopping one group I am in using the group voting methods as we want accountability of elected officers.

Jillian Callahan

Rotary-winged Neko Girl

Join date: 24 Jun 2004

Posts: 3,766

03-22-2005 09:27

Actually, this is just one example of the overall weakness of groups at the moment.

Groups need a LOT of work. Voting on officers on or off or officer/subgroup only. Variable levels of membership and related titles and capabilities. Founder optionally a permanent top-level officer... lots of stuff.

_____________________

Travis Lambert

White dog, red collar

Join date: 3 Jun 2004

Posts: 2,819

03-22-2005 11:27

I posted on this very subject in the Hotline forum a while back here:

/invalid_link.html

If this is an issue that's near & dear to your heart, I strongly encourage you to post your own thread to the hotline as well. While from Robin's response to my post - these changes aren't on the roadmap for 1.6 - possibly if LL sees this as an important issue, there might be a greater chance of it being corrected sooner.

In a perfect world...

-The group 'creator' is fixed, and cannot be removed from the group
-The group 'officers' can only be invited/removed by the group creator
-The group 'members' can be invited/removed by officers and group creator

-Recall Elections? Depreciated.

I'm desperately looking for a way to retain ownership of my land - but still delegate land permissions to a group of officers. The fact that a rogue officer could call a recall election and potentially force me to lose my land is the primary reason I don't have my land owned by group.

What would be perfect for me in that regard, would be to have a group type that accomodated the following...

-Deed the land to the group
-The land "owner" is the group Creator
-Group officers can use any of the object return functions on the land with the exception of the "owner's" (group creator's) objects.
-Group officers can use any of the land ban/eject functions on the land except against the "owner" (Group creator).
-No one allocates their tier to the group other than the group Creator

Sorry to ramble... but this one's pretty important to me

Travis

Travis

Stop recall election spam, require a reason
Kathmandu Gilman Fearful Symmetry Baby! Join date: 21 May 2004 Posts: 1,418	03-21-2005 11:14 It has been a long running problem with groups in SL that is very, very annoying. It is the ability for anyone in the group to initiate a recall election for a group officer. This can be a good thing in rare instances but dag nabbit, it is a needless form of spamming and griefing as it can be initiated anonomously and without a stated reason. I don't know how many times I have had these silly recall messages, how often I have to contact the other members of the group to find out if there is a real reason. I have yet to have a legitimate election out of the dozens I have recieved. Can we at least have a requirement that a reason "MUST" be given or a contact person or website that explains why the election was called before it is ever put up for vote? As it stands now, you either have a griefer giggling in the corner, some sort of bug or some newbie randomly pushing buttons.
Jillian Callahan Rotary-winged Neko Girl Join date: 24 Jun 2004 Posts: 3,766	03-21-2005 11:20 Yes, please! _____________________
Jeffrey Gomez Cubed™ Join date: 11 Jun 2004 Posts: 3,522	03-21-2005 23:30 I agree with this assessment. It's a moot problem, but I do hate getting "recall election" spam to my Inbox when I'm offline. I could care less about them. _____________________ ---
Prokofy Neva Virtualtor Join date: 28 Sep 2004 Posts: 3,698	03-22-2005 00:26 I don't know what dope-smoking hippie tie-dyed idiot invented this socialist fake people's democracy bullshit, but it should be ENTIRELY REMOVED. It is only use to harass legitimate property owners, people who PAY for land that groups own. The rank-and-file members who did NOT PAY should not have the right to REMOVE A PERSON FROM HIS LAND for crying out loud. Junk this, immediately. It's an abomination. _____________________ Rent stalls and walls for $25-$50/week 25-50 prims from Ravenglass Rentals, the mall alternative.
Roberta Dalek Probably trouble Join date: 21 Oct 2004 Posts: 1,174	03-22-2005 02:57 This happens a lot of vendor groups - some starts a recall election against, say, the key officer, and no-one can join the group until it's over. This is being used for griefing currently. Maybe there needs to be a way of making non-democratic groups? Even in cases where the recall of an officer is justified the rules don't really work. If a reason was given for the recall only members who were logged on at the time would see it - groups can't really have debates with the current tools as offline group messages are not saved. FWIW I think this is a good thing as I don't want my IM limit to be reached with lots of events spam. If we are talking about re-doing groups then there needs to be an option for non-secret voting on proposals. Secret voting is stopping one group I am in using the group voting methods as we want accountability of elected officers.
Jillian Callahan Rotary-winged Neko Girl Join date: 24 Jun 2004 Posts: 3,766	03-22-2005 09:27 Actually, this is just one example of the overall weakness of groups at the moment. Groups need a LOT of work. Voting on officers on or off or officer/subgroup only. Variable levels of membership and related titles and capabilities. Founder optionally a permanent top-level officer... lots of stuff. _____________________
Travis Lambert White dog, red collar Join date: 3 Jun 2004 Posts: 2,819	03-22-2005 11:27 I posted on this very subject in the Hotline forum a while back here: /invalid_link.html If this is an issue that's near & dear to your heart, I strongly encourage you to post your own thread to the hotline as well. While from Robin's response to my post - these changes aren't on the roadmap for 1.6 - possibly if LL sees this as an important issue, there might be a greater chance of it being corrected sooner. In a perfect world... -The group 'creator' is fixed, and cannot be removed from the group -The group 'officers' can only be invited/removed by the group creator -The group 'members' can be invited/removed by officers and group creator -Recall Elections? Depreciated. I'm desperately looking for a way to retain ownership of my land - but still delegate land permissions to a group of officers. The fact that a rogue officer could call a recall election and potentially force me to lose my land is the primary reason I don't have my land owned by group. What would be perfect for me in that regard, would be to have a group type that accomodated the following... -Deed the land to the group -The land "owner" is the group Creator -Group officers can use any of the object return functions on the land with the exception of the "owner's" (group creator's) objects. -Group officers can use any of the land ban/eject functions on the land except against the "owner" (Group creator). -No one allocates their tier to the group other than the group Creator Sorry to ramble... but this one's pretty important to me Travis Travis

Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

Stop recall election spam, require a reason