Quote from: nonnakip on March 26, 2013, 01:35:01 PM

Quote from: stan.distortion on March 26, 2013, 01:06:56 PM

Doubt this is possible with the way nastyfans works but I'd like to be able to link my votes to another user, ie. I've a lot of confidence in OgNasty so would link my votes to his decisions. It never made sense to me that organisations base important decisions on who has the most money to buy shares :/

We had a poll for this:

[policy change] add configurable automatic votes
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=86854.msg1513325#msg1513325

It did not pass. In that poll 1393 seats did not vote. If they abstained it would passed.

Quote from: http://www.nastyfans.org/policy -- section: polls / voting

any members that do not vote within thirty days of a poll begin will automatically vote for the "no action" choice

At the most basic level, "not voting" is the very definition of abstention:

Abstention, defined on wikipedia

Who wrote the original policy?

1) the policy redefines abstention, and then hijacks / mis-counts actual, literal acts of abstention (formally defined as not voting) and then changes any true abstention to instead be a vote for "no action"
2) why does OgNasty have control of greater than 25% of the seats, and with it, the ability to unilaterally veto any and all polls
3) it only takes a vote of 25% "no action" to veto any policy changes (a vote with 75% in favor is required to change policy)

Two earlier polls under this new system where ognasty's action was basically the only one that mattered (the outcome of the vote would have been reversed by a significant margin)

Quote from: nonnakip on February 09, 2013, 12:39:03 AM

[member opinion] cancel bASIC orders with BTCFPGA
   no: 2650 (10.8%)
   yes: 21867 (89.2%)
   abstain: 145
   RESULT: CANCEL bASIC ORDERS WITH BTCFPGA

Quote from: nonnakip on February 12, 2013, 11:37:54 PM

[unowned seats] lottery for unclaimed seats
   no: 2655 (10.8%)
   yes: 21963 (89.2%)
   abstain: 44
   RESULT: HOST A LOTTERY FOR UNOWNED SEATS

Just wanted to point out that nowhere in the nastyfans policy was there any specification / written understanding or documentation (nor any post on this forum) to authorize OgNasty to suddenly have control over treasury seats, complete with voting rights:

Quote from: kuzetsa on March 08, 2013, 08:19:17 AM

Previously, the majority were "treasury shares" back on GLBSE with no voting power or dividends (distributions of donation in the new nastyfans fanclub thingy) ... who is controlling the votes on these "seats" now that everything is on nastyfans.org? It's very different than the way things were handled previously -- On GLBSE, things were more "normal-like" where a distinction was made between:

outstanding shares (regular members / users / shareholders)
treasury shares (no voting rights or distributions / dividends)

And with no justification for how / why the treasury seats now have voting power, OgNasty acknowledged full control of this unbalanced ability to overrule pretty much any and all votes:

Quote from: OgNasty on March 08, 2013, 09:27:01 PM

Quote from: kuzetsa on March 08, 2013, 08:19:17 AM

... who is controlling the votes on these "seats" now that everything is on nastyfans.org?

I am.

TLDR
(Too long / didn't read... basically, this section is a summary)

So really, we have a mockery of a voting system:

1) abstention is instead automatically treated like a veto / converted to a vote of "take no action which can be used to fix or amend broken policy"
2) the mining operations manager (or whatever OgNasty's title is) basically has full veto power for everything
(treasury seats are no longer treated separately like they're supposed to be)
3) there is no "3" ... I'll just add that while technically, the 75% "majority vote" requirement isn't inherently abnormal, it's easily abused in light of point number 2