OK, So I had this idea the other day and would like to share it to see if it is possible.
I think the idea itself is good, but I'm not sure if it is possible.

For the upcoming Great Council, would it be possible for everyone involved to be given an anonymous name?
Like everyone would be named Anonymous, or Anonymous #1, #2, etc.

This way, nobody could bring up personal attacks on each other, we wouldn't have to deal with thread jacking when people go off topic complaining about things that happened years ago.
We would be able to avoid the potential toxicity that I expect we will have during the GC.
We could post everyone's proposals initially, and then grant everyone access as anonymous members to post throughout the GC.

Would we have to do this on a separate forum, with a neutral root admin?
Am I thinking to optimistically? 

Please provide your feedback on this idea, or if it would be possible.

Thanks!

Semi-Unretired

Reply

I think it would be a great idea in theory, but It might be too hard to implement. I don't know.

I am Zadiner/Zak. Part of Assembly, some other stuff, Founder of some other region.
Hey, I have a bunch of issues. You don't need to care.
Emoji of the week:  :dodgy:

Reply

I'm just wondering if it would have to be done on a different forum in order to get all the anonymous names.

Semi-Unretired

Reply

I think it would be a great idea in theory, but It might be too hard to implement. I don't know.

I basically agree with this. Good idea, not sure how hard the implementation would be.

There is also the problem that HEM has already posted his constitutional proposal here, and I posted mine before withdrawing it after Glen persuaded me that it would be best to wait for the Great Council. People will already recognize our proposals, so I'm not sure it's fair to give others anonymity in submitting their proposals when ours may be judged not only by their content, but also by who is proposing them.

Reply

I think it would be a great idea in theory, but It might be too hard to implement. I don't know.

I basically agree with this. Good idea, not sure how hard the implementation would be.

There is also the problem that HEM has already posted his constitutional proposal here, and I posted mine before withdrawing it after Glen persuaded me that it would be best to wait for the Great Council. People will already recognize our proposals, so I'm not sure it's fair to give others anonymity in submitting their proposals when ours may be judged not only by their content, but also by who is proposing them.

Well my thinking was we could post the proposals that are already out there before hand, and then the replies would still be anonymous. Your proposal, and HEM's, would already be posted before the replies would be allowed.

Semi-Unretired

Reply

Well my thinking was we could post the proposals that are already out there before hand, and then the replies would still be anonymous. Your proposal, and HEM's, would already be posted before the replies would be allowed.

The issue I'm seeing with that, in our super contentious atmosphere at the moment, is that it will allow people to level anonymous personal attacks against HEM and me in the process of commenting on our proposals, since they will know the proposals are ours. Meanwhile, someone who has not yet posted a proposal will be able to do so anonymously and won't face that same potential issue.

Personally, I can take personal attacks, anonymous or not, I'm just pointing out the potential for an unfair process for those whose proposals are already posted with their names attached.

Reply

That would be another reason for having a neutral Root Admin on the forum that would host the GC.
The Admin would be able to lay down the rules before the GC starts, that no personal attacks can be made, or whatever rules we see fit to accompany the anonymous usernames.

Semi-Unretired

Reply

That would be another reason for having a neutral Root Admin on the forum that would host the GC.
The Admin would be able to lay down the rules before the GC starts, that no personal attacks can be made, or whatever rules we see fit to accompany the anonymous usernames.

That could be workable.

There is an additional issue that springs to mind: Would it be legal to use a different forum for the Great Council, given this one is the only forum listed in the charter?

Reply

Article IV - Adoption of Procedures

1. At the beginning of a Great Council, all citizens will vote on a procedural resolution.
2. The procedural resolution must include the choice of a Chair of the Great Council, who will be responsible for administrative tasks, and a basic timeline. Additionally, the Great Council must decide how voting on proposals will occur.
3. In order to prevent possible conflicts of interests, the Chair of the Great Council is separate from the Chair of the Assembly, but the latter is not prohibited from serving in the position.
4. The timeline provided within this resolution may be altered at any time through a simple motion with the support of at least to other participants.
5. Submission of proposals may not occur until this resolution passes.

It could be established in the opening procedural resolution to host the GC on another forum so that the anonymous masking could be used?

Semi-Unretired

Reply

Yep, that looks like it would work. Well, as long as there is a neutral root admin and we can set firm rules against anonymous personal attacks, I'm for this idea. It would take personal considerations, and individual political gain, out of the Great Council process.

Reply