I would like for you to elect an op for the turn chats

[GenMarshall]

Originally posted by Octavian X
I also see no need to use elections for accountability purposes. If anything, electing ops could be harmful to the room, as it creates the possibility of a constant change in ops, which can wreak havoc when one doesn't know how to run things like the previous one did. Stability is the best for chatrooms.

I have to agree with Oct on this one.

 

[FortyJ]

It takes all of 10 minutes to learn the various commands needed to effectively "police" a room. Give the new ops a night to purge themselves of the desire to needlessly devoice and/or kick people out of the room (preferably not during a turn chat ), and they're ready to go.

I don't see how this could be harmful. Besides, a constant change in ops could be a good thing. Perhaps even a mandatory rotation through the entire citizenry might create a calmer, more productive chat session, since everyone would have a better understanding of proper behavior during an official chat.

Of course, perhaps I'm just being myopic, so I encourage the opposing viewpoint to illustrate precisely how an elected op could wreak havoc on the chat room.

 

[Eklektikos]

Originally posted by Octavian X
FortyJ is right when it comes to the part about destroying the room and recreating it. It's a tedious process to change the room's ownership.

We're evidently using the wrong network then. Switching channel ownership over on StarChat has certainly never proved difficult for me.

 

[ravensfire]

As eryei as mentioned this in the CoS turn chat thread, have we reached a conclusion on this?

-- Ravensfire

 

[Cyc]

So we'd have the owner of the room (who? disorganizer?), the Designated Player (automatically assigned Operator status - no need to be elected) and 2 back-up Ops (who would be elected?). Can we get an organizational chart going here to help us think this through?