Comments | lj_nifty: new maintainer

burr86 in lj_nifty

new maintainer

Mar 10, 2007 23:02

Thank you to everyone who voted. :) This last vote was even closer than the one before it -- 77 to 76 -- with only one vote breaking the tie. (I don't think I've ever seen a poll come that close!) Congratulations to nikolasco, our new lj_nifty maintainer. :)

Comments 24

adudeabides March 11 2007, 06:12:11 UTC

Allow me to be the first to extend a congratulations to nikolasco.

ccnuggie March 11 2007, 06:39:13 UTC

don't blame me, I voted for kodos

beeooll March 11 2007, 06:44:36 UTC

rofl

opyl March 11 2007, 06:54:09 UTC

Reasons why I think this is BS:

1) The second poll shouldn't have immediately followed the first poll. At the very minimum, there should have been an announcement about the second poll before the second poll was in place.

2) The poll did not run for as long as the first poll did, nor did they run on the same days. Friday to Saturday versus Monday through Thursday. I work extra hours on Friday and Saturday and almost missed the note that I had to vote again. Does this make a difference? Yes it does. It's almost 1:00 am CST and adudeabides is ahead by one vote. (As a side note, if a small margin was the pure reason for a second poll, the proper thing to have done would have be to extend the duration of the original poll. That way, neither candidate would risk losing any votes.)

3) adudeabides is ahead on both polls and is still getting more votes on both polls. Do we know for sure that people know they're putting their votes in the right place? Moreover, doesn't that say something about what the community members want ( ... )

opyl March 11 2007, 07:06:48 UTC

Oops! One more thing...

5) Only one person suggested the run-off vote. But two people recommended the second poll run for as long as the first one did. It doesn't make sense for the mod to take the first suggestion at a run-off but ignore two people who suggest that it should run longer.

burr86 March 11 2007, 07:08:07 UTC

#5: The two people who recommended that it be extended to a longer period of time did so after voting had begun, rather than beforehand. Of course, if the second poll was announced beforehand, I'd have gladly taken that into consideration, but the fact is that it wasn't, and therefore I wasn't going to change the deadline halfway through the voting period.

burr86 March 11 2007, 07:08:05 UTC

#1 and #2: The second poll received more total votes than the first one; if the second poll had fewer voters than the first, I'd have extended the deadline, but since that's not the case, I don't feel it's necessary to do so. Had I seen a significant impact as a result of the shorter period or different time period, I'd've extended the deadline, but that doesn't appear to be the case ( ... )

charliemc March 11 2007, 06:59:08 UTC

Wow... Sorry I missed the voting.

(I guess that's what happens when RL bangs the shit out of you for several days... er... weeks!)

And many congrats to nikolasco. Good luck in your new role!

andy March 11 2007, 08:10:59 UTC

Congratulations!