05Command Thread
Heya all, coming at you today with the issue of our current quorum.
As of my writing this, we need 50% of Active Staff to vote on any given policy for it to pass. This, I feel, has not aged well from when it was written.
From what I figure this was decided back when the charter was written, and since the charter states votes should only go on for 24 hours, I think it's safe to assume whatever kind of staff configuration was set up back then is a far cry from the one we have now. I can say that personally, I've had to go out and seek people to vote whenever I proposed policy purely to pass quorum, and many times I only reached quorum by a hair. The last vote we put forward, the navigational redesign, passed by the exact needed amount. To add to this, our relatively high quorum has been brought up as an issue before, both whenever people had to call others to vote, and when it was brought up that just not voting on a proposal was a better method of sinking it than voting against it. (Better method, but a dirty trick to pull.)
Additionally, we have a lot of staffers who just aren't that interested in policy and votes, and are more interested in doing… well, their job. Some people don't want to open staffchat every other day to witness a blazing inferno because someone said something on twitter last night, and would rather just stick to posting on twitter, tagging articles, or anything else of the sort, so we end up having a lot of active staffers who are "dead weight" in terms of quorum.
Hell, in actual real life politics, where everyone's job is just to look at policy and vote, the typical quorum is 1/3rd or less!
Due to all of that, I feel like we should lower the quorum onsite from 50%, to 1/4th, 1/3rd, or at the most 2/5ths.
What does everyone else think?
