[stickgod91]

As intelli said we could make a poll to go back to the old system, although this isn't necessarily the same. What I am suggesting is that incase a redicolous suggestion is made and for some reason it get more positive vote favoring it it can be vetod by intelli such as a US president is able to.

[dlgn]

MineRealm being a democracy is awesome, but mob rule would be horrible. For example, a lot of people wanted the nether to be expanded back in the day, before villager trading.

http://minerealm.com/community/viewtopi ... w=viewpoll

~dlgn

[Radio]

Grammar Nazi's everywhere frown upon you.. But otherwise yes, great point.

[Rokkrwolf]

Technically Intelli can still rule them out if he wanted too. That should be a given but a few changed may need to be changed regarding certain suggestions.

[Intelli]

MineRealm being a democracy is awesome, but mob rule would be horrible. For example, a lot of people wanted the nether to be expanded back in the day, before villager trading.

http://minerealm.com/community/viewtopi ... w=viewpoll

~dlgn

Yea, need to keep things like the economy in mind

[Prodigy9]

As much as I like having a bit more influence over the server's development, the first thing I thought when reading the crowdsourcing thread was "Oh God, this is so incredibly exploitable." IIRC, the worst possible offenses--creating legions of forum alts to rig votes--is impossible due to a requirement of verifying IGN when creating new votes. However, any banned players who stick around to cause trouble (I'm not saying all of them are bad... but some could be...) could still vote or even create new suggestions designed to derail the server.

In my opinion, having "veto" power for the guy running the show (or, alternatively, for the staff as a whole to vote on) would help prevent abuse of this system.

[stickgod91]

Grammar Nazi's everywhere frown upon you.. But otherwise yes, great point.

While on mobile it's much harder to review and revive grammar, my apologies.

[The-Jack-DeCk]

As much as I like having a bit more influence over the server's development, the first thing I thought when reading the crowdsourcing thread was "Oh God, this is so incredibly exploitable." IIRC, the worst possible offenses--creating legions of forum alts to rig votes--is impossible due to a requirement of verifying IGN when creating new votes. However, any banned players who stick around to cause trouble (I'm not saying all of them are bad... but some could be...) could still vote or even create new suggestions designed to derail the server.

In my opinion, having "veto" power for the guy running the show (or, alternatively, for the staff as a whole to vote on) would help prevent abuse of this system.

Prodigy, that gives me an idea: make banned players not able to vote and have a mandatory IP check

Stick, if you can edit the OP you may want to add these in if you agree with them.

[Prodigy9]

Nice modification, Jack. Now that you mention it, wasn't that sort of system used a while ago? There was some kind of poll where Intelli pledged to rule based on the voting (selling items for realm money, I think?), and sorted through the votes to remove alts and banned players prior to announcing the results.

[The-Jack-DeCk]

Yeah, he's done that before I beleive. Thanks for making me aware of the problems. Without your thoughts, we might be in for some trouble.

Still waiting to see if stick slips it in,..