What kind of threshold should a vote have to pass before being implemented? Do we really want to be making changes based on a vote that only got one “Aye”? Ten Ayes? Over 50% of the user base?
What kind of vote engagement can we reasonably expect to achieve? Is it actually likely that 50% of the user base will engage with any particular vote? Are there any useful presidents out there?
Who should be responsible for counting the votes when they’re over? Perhaps the OP tallies the votes and edits the post?
Is there an easy test the mods can apply to a tallied vote to allow them to check whether it’s passed? Something that is not open to interpretation and results in a clear directive to make a change?
I’m also kind of testing out this discussion format as a way of generating things to vote on i.e DISCUSSION > POLL > VOTE seems to make sense.
We’ll see :)
I think it should just provide information rather than making conclusive decision of aye or nay, and humans should have the final say. There could be a count separating ayes and nays for subscribers and guests which the bot could put in a comment along with other stats.
As a side note: Here Randomocity says “Nay until some evidence is posted” and then evidence is posted, but a bot would still count that as nay. So maybe maybe have a symbol like
/aye. That could over complicate things though.I get what you’re saying but ultimately, the information the bot is providing would just be “the humans say they want this and meets the threshold they’ve set”.
It’s not making any decisions on its own.
To your point about “Nay until evidence”, that seems to me to be working as intended. A Nay is a Nay until the user changes their vote. You’d want the bot to count that.