Hello. As you are probably aware, there are rules on what backgrounds are and aren't allowed.
Since this is a subjective issue, there is a voting process to determine what is and isn't allowed.
This process involves as many experienced volunteers as possible - potentially the entire NAT, GMT, and BNG.
There are also rules on what songs are and aren't allowed. This is also a subjective issue (edit: especially in cases of "heavily political" songs).
Since it is a subjective issue, there is a voting process that involves theentire NAT... but not the GMT or BNG.
I think the current Content Voting Process is a great system for determining appropriateness in a subjective system.
Therefore, I propose that the rules be amended so that if an NAT/GMT member finds a song inappropriate, it is subject to the more transparent CVP instead of the current system of the NAT voting.
Specifically, I propose the Song Content Rules should be changed from this:
to this:
Feel free to propose changes to the proposal or its phrasing - this is a very democratic website, and perhaps you have a better idea.
Points of discussion:
Should the BNs be allowed a vote? (IMO: Yes, they should - the CVP limits BNs' power in a good compromise)
Since this is a subjective issue, there is a voting process to determine what is and isn't allowed.
This process involves as many experienced volunteers as possible - potentially the entire NAT, GMT, and BNG.
There are also rules on what songs are and aren't allowed. This is also a subjective issue (edit: especially in cases of "heavily political" songs).
Since it is a subjective issue, there is a voting process that involves the
I think the current Content Voting Process is a great system for determining appropriateness in a subjective system.
Therefore, I propose that the rules be amended so that if an NAT/GMT member finds a song inappropriate, it is subject to the more transparent CVP instead of the current system of the NAT voting.
Specifically, I propose the Song Content Rules should be changed from this:
You may contest this with them via PM if you so wish, or seek the opinions of others to substantiate your claim to the track's suitability. If you still cannot find common ground on this front, your claim may be escalated to a consensus vote among the current NAT members, who will collectively decide if your track is acceptable or not.
to this:
You may contest this with them via PM if you so wish, or seek the opinions of others to substantiate your claim to the track's suitability. If you still cannot find common ground on this front, your claim may be escalated to a vote among the current NAT and GMT members, who will collectively decide if your track is acceptable or not as specified in the Content Voting Process.
Feel free to propose changes to the proposal or its phrasing - this is a very democratic website, and perhaps you have a better idea.
Points of discussion:
Should the BNs be allowed a vote? (IMO: Yes, they should - the CVP limits BNs' power in a good compromise)