[Unofficial] HALL OF FAME

[Blitzaholic]

So tell me, where was the selection for the Criteria Committee made from. Everybody that volunteered, volunteered to be on the Selection Committee, not the Criteria Committee.

It was in the other thread denominator, in fact, you posted what to do, lol. This thread is just for nominations and selections and I decided to stay out of it as some suggested, Master Fenrir was kind enough to take the lead on this and he is collecting names and I think sharing with Jp. The criteria group was formed several weeks ago.

Right now, I think the best course of action is to create a usergroup. This is the group that will come up with the rules for how the whole process works. This usergroup will decide how Hall of Famers get chosen, the process by which they are chosen, the criteria upon which this is based, and potentially, the judges/jurors. Anyone in the criteria committee is not eligible to be a judge or juror, for the reasons Fruitcake posted. They need to be kept separate. I think this, Blitz, is where you fit best. Pick up anyone else you want and run this group.

Then we can actually get something positive going forward. Selecting jurors at this point is putting the cart ahead of the horse, when we don't even know how we'll be picking Hall of Famers. Get a committee together and get this hammered out properly.

Pretty much at the time their was not a lot of expressed interest by many, there were a few dozen or more that was willing to work towards forming this goal. I did get the usergroup together as you suggested. It was also suggested the original names on the criteria committee, that some were hand picked by me, I just asked a few players who I thought had honesty and integrity to the cc site, but, to save argument or bias as some may of thought, I took them all off and started over and got a whole new committee with diversity as suggested, even though you told me to:

Pick up anyone else you want and run this group.

I just started from scratch and or started over with all new cc people, more in the next paragraph.

It was then suggested I get a diverse group of cc players if I wanted this to work, ex. players, clan individuals, tourney people, mods, former mods, admin, newsletter staff, map makers, etc, and we did so. I do not know any of these people at all, I may know of some of them, again, I just followed what some CC'ers were yelling out loudly. Again, too many cooks in the kitchen is not good, the thought was around 15 members for each committee. We have 15 plus me in the criteria group, with andy and lack to oversee it if they choose. Finally, I know Fc has expressed some interest in criteria and denominator seemed to have yelled loudly of expressing great interest in criteria committee, even though, I never heard you once say this in other thread, anyways, I have one slot open. Inc. pm'd me and said he was sorry, but, he has too much on his plate to commit to the HoF, so, I replaced Incandenza with denominator and invited you in denominator. Now, try to stay positive, the criteria committee we have is working well and we proudly accept you in.

Fruitcake, Jpcloet and others can work and suggest on the nomination and selections committee regulations, where they want to separate that or not. They both as well as others have valuable insight to help ensure this is worked properly, I have enough politics to deal with in the criteria one. Thx all for your expressed interest.

[Fruitcake]

Originally, I thought there would be 3 Committees: Criteria, Nominations & Selections, and Judges. I liked this idea, because it soon became clear that the general public believed Blitz was loading the judging panel with "the chosen." I thought the Nominations & Selection committee, chosen by public vote, would prevent any bias of the judge's panel.

Then, FC and Chip proved that their eloquence trumped Blitz's excitement, and proposed 2 Committees: Criteria and Nominations & Selections, to which Blitz conceded. I'm not sure what the end process was supposed to be here. The 2nd committee creates a list of possible HoFers and the public voted on it? I had reservations. Persuasive PMs would be sent out calling for votes in a close race, multi accounts created solely for the purpose of voting, etc. It sounds silly, but it would happen. However, I went along as it seemed to me that Fruitcake had taken on the persona of The Voice of the People.

yeah MF, you are right, I caved in to fruitcake as well, but, really fruitcake, chip and denominator spoke so loudly, it seemed like they were the voice of CC, but, there was a fair amount that liked what I was doing prior, so to save face and argument, I remained open and changed, and I took many suggestions from the public of CC as well in that thread and changed things, I also stripped all 15 originally off the criteria committee who was on it before, cause some thought it was bias, lol, it wasn't, but, I stripped them all off that panel. It was suggested I try various ranks, and diversity of clans, public, map maker's newsletter writers, mods, former mods etc. so, we did all this. I also got the private forum, I spent over 30 exhausting hours approximately working on this off and on for years, months and recently weeks. I also gave the chair up, I have no interest, I also gave up control as others have asked. There was starting to get way too many cooks in the kitchen, all suggestions different ideas. I stayed open to them all and changed many things. Anyway, let's try to move forward.

I have lost the plot here a while ago. Three committees?

1.- Criteria
2.- Nominations
3.- Final Selection into the HoF

The first one will only exist until the criteria are set. Why not turn that one into the second one? Then have a separate one do the final selection.

The first two (whether merged or not) will be the most work and I'm not too keen of being a part of them. I'm still open to be a part of the third one.

Lx

however if any name from either committee comes up, how would this work? I would need to think about this, it is a good suggestion Lx.

Nominations could com from the Criteria Committee and I would suspect the first round would come from them. The public should also be able to nominate as well.

Seems like Jp agrees about the merge of criteria and nominations being one group and selections a 2nd group.

However, I am not sure if the public should vote or not due to what master fenrir said, I mean someone could create multi accounts and vote for themselves, pm tons a players and ask them to vote, etc. Not sure that would work well.

What I was thinking was the cc public could vote on the names of the 2nd committee named the selection committee and the top 15 votes form the poll would be in the final selection committee, again , this could be manipulated too. Once we establish who the 15 are in the selections committee, they would take the nominations of players we suggested that met the criteria. The thing is if the criteria committee comes up with the criteria and also nominates players and they find 3 of the 5 they nominated fits the criteria, what is the sense of sending it to the final selections committee? The criteria and nominations did all the work and establish these 3 made it for example? So then, what does the selection committee really do? Just review it to ensure we are accurate? See what I mean?

If we do establish the 15 for selections committee, I was thinking a player could get inducted if 10 of the 15 jurors of the selections committee agree, I mean that is two-thirds.

To me, the criteria committee has it's hands full and has a ton of work to do and it may take some more time. Perhaps, the criteria committee just sticks with the criteria as that is a bulk of a workload and the 2nd committee be the nominations and selections.

If we define all the criteria, then the other committee comes up with some names that they think
be eligible, then they just review them, if they meet the criteria, they are in, I mean each of the 15 members could vote, and discuss things out to ensure all are on the same page and they may need a separate forum themselves. But, the nominations and selections committee to me does not seem to be a lot of work at all if them 2 are merged, this is why I thought those 2 should be merged. That committee of nominations and selections needs to decide how often this will occur, is it review 5 worthy cc names every 4 months? all 5 could go in? I do not see why not, if all 5 meet a majority of the criteria. What you all think?

Phew Blitz, the words wind and changing spring to mind when reading your posts. Notwithstanding the utter confusion your mind seems to be in whilst writing, there are some glaring inconsistencies, once again, in your post. Now do try to keep up dear boy, for it seems that every time clear water appears, you step forward, with the best intentions I am sure, and tumble right in, mixing your messages up to the extent that leaves many breathless. However, fortunately for you, I am keeping a tight grip on recording all that is said and all that is decided.

Leaving aside the inconsistencies in your approach and direction Blitz (which, ironically, are about the only consistent thing we can rely on) we really need to focus on the here and now.

First up:

I'm interested

sensfan, if you are interested, please PM JPCloet and Master Fenrir as well. This will ensure your name goes forward.

So...where are we all regarding the 'public' committees. Now just in case any one gets confused by this, when I say public committees I mean the (potential) TWO committees who will actively run the HoF. By TWO I mean one committee which will nominate, accept nominations for review, discuss those nominations etc etc. The other committee being the actual final arbiters who will decide from the shortlist given as to who should be awarded the HoF membership.

The present sitting committee, now commonly known as the Criteria Committee are presently sitting and, one hopes, working towards the day when we, the members of cc, will get to read their first draft regarding the criteria required for a member to be nominated. The members of this committee can be found on this page: memberlist.php?mode=group&g=193052
This committee which, no doubt, is doing a sterling job in what will ultimately be a thankless task will then disband after the final criteria are reached. The Chairman of the Criteria committee can then hand these over to the ‘Public’ committees and retire gracefully.

The mechanics of how the ‘Public’ committees will work does not have to be decided yet. This is not the platform to do so. Let us keep focussed on why this thread exists, to ensure any member, who so wishes, can put their name forward for election by the members of cc. Before this election takes place, a system of representation will be worked out to ensure equal opportunity and fairness. It is all too easy to rush in and start suggesting the numbers of awards to be given, how often and when, but this can all be reviewed after the election.

I am sure many of you have input still to give, but I do ask that you show patience, allow the lists of those who have put themselves forward to be completed, then allow the voting process to take place and finally to wish all those who are voted for the very best in their endeavours.

Once the voting has finished JPCloet, who has a fine reputation in keeping track of multiple records (see the Clan League work he does so well) will work out who has qualified to sit on the ‘Public’ committees. This will ensure all is above board and transparent whilst leaving as little room for dispute as is possible.

So, if you know any one you think would want to serve the community in such a way, then tell them about this. The more inclusive this is the better it will be for the cc community in the long term.

May I take this opportunity to thank Blitz for all his hard work over the months and years (as he himself mentions on more than one occasion) and publicly applaud his efforts, for without them who knows how far down this road we would now be!

[Blitzaholic]

May I take this opportunity to thank Blitz for all his hard work over the months and years (as he himself mentions on more than one occasion) and publicly applaud his efforts, for without them who knows how far down this road we would now be!

thank you Fc and thanks again for all your suggestions and feedback to help make this perhaps become more official. We may need to stop being so nice to each other lately or some may think we are lovers.

[Natascha]

May I take this opportunity to thank Blitz for all his hard work over the months and years (as he himself mentions on more than one occasion) and publicly applaud his efforts, for without them who knows how far down this road we would now be!

thank you Fc and thanks again for all your suggestions and feedback to help make this perhaps become more official. We may need to stop being so nice to each other lately or some may think we are lovers.

Can I please join this group hug???????
Is it cutesy club day again?

Blitz, stop flirting with guys..... your reputation is going down.

[denominator]

So tell me, where was the selection for the Criteria Committee made from. Everybody that volunteered, volunteered to be on the Selection Committee, not the Criteria Committee.

It was in the other thread denominator, in fact, you posted what to do, lol. This thread is just for nominations and selections and I decided to stay out of it as some suggested, Master Fenrir was kind enough to take the lead on this and he is collecting names and I think sharing with Jp. The criteria group was formed several weeks ago.

Right now, I think the best course of action is to create a usergroup. This is the group that will come up with the rules for how the whole process works. This usergroup will decide how Hall of Famers get chosen, the process by which they are chosen, the criteria upon which this is based, and potentially, the judges/jurors. Anyone in the criteria committee is not eligible to be a judge or juror, for the reasons Fruitcake posted. They need to be kept separate. I think this, Blitz, is where you fit best. Pick up anyone else you want and run this group.

Then we can actually get something positive going forward. Selecting jurors at this point is putting the cart ahead of the horse, when we don't even know how we'll be picking Hall of Famers. Get a committee together and get this hammered out properly.

Pretty much at the time their was not a lot of expressed interest by many, there were a few dozen or more that was willing to work towards forming this goal. I did get the usergroup together as you suggested. It was also suggested the original names on the criteria committee, that some were hand picked by me, I just asked a few players who I thought had honesty and integrity to the cc site, but, to save argument or bias as some may of thought, I took them all off and started over and got a whole new committee with diversity as suggested, even though you told me to:

Pick up anyone else you want and run this group.

I just started from scratch and or started over with all new cc people, more in the next paragraph.

It was then suggested I get a diverse group of cc players if I wanted this to work, ex. players, clan individuals, tourney people, mods, former mods, admin, newsletter staff, map makers, etc, and we did so. I do not know any of these people at all, I may know of some of them, again, I just followed what some CC'ers were yelling out loudly. Again, too many cooks in the kitchen is not good, the thought was around 15 members for each committee. We have 15 plus me in the criteria group, with andy and lack to oversee it if they choose. Finally, I know Fc has expressed some interest in criteria and denominator seemed to have yelled loudly of expressing great interest in criteria committee, even though, I never heard you once say this in other thread, anyways, I have one slot open. Inc. pm'd me and said he was sorry, but, he has too much on his plate to commit to the HoF, so, I replaced Incandenza with denominator and invited you in denominator. Now, try to stay positive, the criteria committee we have is working well and we proudly accept you in.

Fruitcake, Jpcloet and others can work and suggest on the nomination and selections committee regulations, where they want to separate that or not. They both as well as others have valuable insight to help ensure this is worked properly, I have enough politics to deal with in the criteria one. Thx all for your expressed interest.

Wow Blitzy, I do believe that's one of the most coherent posts I've ever seen you put together. I am impressed.

I think you are doing a good job of taking advice on this one, and, as you pointed out, much of how you handled putting together the Criteria Committee was indeed posted by me. I also realize, reading my posts about it, seem to have a very negative undertone and whiney "why wasn't I put on it" sense. This was not my intention, however, I am honoured to be handed a spot as I feel I am better suited to hammering out the criteria than to picking and voting on HoFers.

I am also pleasantly surprised to see that this thread has moved in a more positive direction - it seems most of the naysayers have either converted to supporting the idea or have had their say and moved on. I think this is on the right track and there is a diverse enough set of people working on it to put together something useful.

[chipv]

Congratulations, Blitz, this is starting to take shape now, the Criteria group looks good, and people are starting to get on board.

Ignoring your acolytes who seem more intent on defending you than actually reading the content of people who are clearly trying to help
(they are about as important to this discussion as a subduction zone is to a nail technician) I think you are gradually getting a handle on this, so
well done.

Keep the momentum going as we would all like to see this coming to fruition soon.

Please consider all proposals put to you, and read in full, that's pretty much all to say, and you're doing good.

[Gold Knight]

Im just wondering if this criteria committee is focusing on the the prerequisites to even be considered for nomination, or is putting an importance on certain accomplishments over others, or what exactly their doing as i dont really have a good feel on that yet. I feel that its going to be tough to put a set criteria for some people that should definately be up for a nomination but have different sets of skills. So basically just looking for what the overall objective that's trying to be met.

[laughingcavalier]

I feel that its going to be tough to put a set criteria for some people that should definately be up for a nomination but have different sets of skills. So basically just looking for what the overall objective that's trying to be met.

Good question. There was masses written about this in the other thread, and the usergoup aka criteria committee is trying to pull that together into a sensible form, so we can post it back here and hopefully get agreement. I don't think it's going to be an enormous or a difficult task but it will take a while. "Watch this space but don't expect anything too soon," is probably the best way to think of it.

[laughingcavalier]

It really is nice to have these group hugs

Yes indeed, good summaries from Blitz and FC. I do think we need some more clarification on how the HoF is going to run after the current criteria group winds up. Currently mechanics and structure look like this;

Fruitcake, Jpcloet and others can work and suggest on the nomination and selections committee regulations, where they want to separate that or not. They both as well as others have valuable insight to help ensure this is worked properly, I have enough politics to deal with in the criteria one. Thx all for your expressed interest.

The mechanics of how the ‘Public’ committees will work does not have to be decided yet. This is not the platform to do so. Let us keep focussed on why this thread exists, to ensure any member, who so wishes, can put their name forward for election by the members of cc. Before this election takes place, a system of representation will be worked out to ensure equal opportunity and fairness. It is all too easy to rush in and start suggesting the numbers of awards to be given, how often and when, but this can all be reviewed after the election.

Once the voting has finished JPCloet, who has a fine reputation in keeping track of multiple records (see the Clan League work he does so well) will work out who has qualified to sit on the ‘Public’ committees. This will ensure all is above board and transparent whilst leaving as little room for dispute as is possible.

This seems really vague to me, and to leave way too many open questions on how the Hall of Fame will be run. We have a whole lot of open issues:
Some seem to be decided in principle but we have not worked through all the details yet - for example there will be a nominations committee, but what sort of list will it hand on to the selection committee?
Some are wide open, eg how do we run a fair and open election?
Some are potential timebombs - eg what happens if a selector is nominated for the HoF, and the selectors have not been told how to handle that situation?
Some have not been raised yet, eg does the selection committee decide by majority vote, by consensus, by some other means?

As Fruitcake says, this thread is not the place to decide on those, but somebody has to. Or at least to come up with proposals that can be agreed in a public place like this thread. If the criteria committee just hands over its criteria and nothing else to the next committee, it is like putting 15 people in a boat and pointing to a distant shore. Shouldn't we be giving them oars or a sail?

I am acutely aware that there are big questions about the legitimacy of the current usergroup aka the criteria committee. But previous posts have also questioned how we could get fair election results, everyone agrees you can't do detail effectively in a GD thread, and to me it would be plain wrong to wind up and give everything to Fruitcake and jpcloet to organise. I am concerned that if we don't iron out the structures and processes of the HoF at an early stage, then the public committees that come after the current ad hoc group will have the same problems of legitimacy.

So what I'm saying is we need soon to decide the detail of the nomination and selections committee regulations, how the HoF will run. I don't think I'm being obsessive about this - I hope!- just trying to avoid the next potential pitfall.

I see two ways of doing this:

1. The current user group is tasked, as well as drafting the criteria of what a HoFer is, of drafting the criteria for how the committees that come after it will operate, putting flesh on the bones of what has been discussed in GD. We'd have to check the usergroup is willing and equipped to deal with this. These drafts would then come back to GD for review before we wind up.

2. The second committee, the elected committee currently known as the nominations committee, would be responsible for planning the detail of the nomination and selections committee regulations, how the HoF will run. If this is the case then people who are nominating themselves for this committee should know now they will have a bit of work to do beyond looking over candidates and criteria. And someone (criteria committee? someone else?) would have to devise & run free and fair elections to the second cttee. <small edit here>

Hoping I'm not the only one who sees the need for a bit more planning at this stage, and that one of the above proposals, or another, if someone has one, will help move us on.

[Gold Knight]

I agree that there are several issues that need to be worked out for the actual players that are going to be involved, in both the committe and those nominated, but it may be held off until that committee is actually chosen to discuss, similar to how issues are being worked out in the Criteria comm (or that i believe are being worked out). Think there have already been a few ideas thrown about, but nothing set in stone.

[stahrgazer]

Im just wondering if this criteria committee is focusing on the the prerequisites to even be considered for nomination, or is putting an importance on certain accomplishments over others, or what exactly their doing as i dont really have a good feel on that yet. I feel that its going to be tough to put a set criteria for some people that should definately be up for a nomination but have different sets of skills. So basically just looking for what the overall objective that's trying to be met.

they're still working that out, GK, so that's why you don't have a feel for it

[Gold Knight]

Im just wondering if this criteria committee is focusing on the the prerequisites to even be considered for nomination, or is putting an importance on certain accomplishments over others, or what exactly their doing as i dont really have a good feel on that yet. I feel that its going to be tough to put a set criteria for some people that should definately be up for a nomination but have different sets of skills. So basically just looking for what the overall objective that's trying to be met.

they're still working that out, GK, so that's why you don't have a feel for it

Makes sense, thanks for the heads up. Just figured id keep asking questions to keep the thread relevant...

[Blitzaholic]

Congratulations, Blitz, this is starting to take shape now, the Criteria group looks good, and people are starting to get on board.

Ignoring your acolytes who seem more intent on defending you than actually reading the content of people who are clearly trying to help
(they are about as important to this discussion as a subduction zone is to a nail technician) I think you are gradually getting a handle on this, so
well done.

Keep the momentum going as we would all like to see this coming to fruition soon.

Please consider all proposals put to you, and read in full, that's pretty much all to say, and you're doing good.

thx chip

Im just wondering if this criteria committee is focusing on the the prerequisites to even be considered for nomination, or is putting an importance on certain accomplishments over others, or what exactly their doing as i dont really have a good feel on that yet. I feel that its going to be tough to put a set criteria for some people that should definately be up for a nomination but have different sets of skills. So basically just looking for what the overall objective that's trying to be met.

they're still working that out, GK, so that's why you don't have a feel for it

Makes sense, thanks for the heads up. Just figured id keep asking questions to keep the thread relevant...

we are still discussing many things, it will be some time before we can finalize anything. Thx for your interest and patience.

[Blitzaholic]

Im just wondering if this criteria committee is focusing on the the prerequisites to even be considered for nomination, or is putting an importance on certain accomplishments over others, or what exactly their doing as i dont really have a good feel on that yet. I feel that its going to be tough to put a set criteria for some people that should definately be up for a nomination but have different sets of skills. So basically just looking for what the overall objective that's trying to be met.

we really cannot discuss what we are discussing currently

may still be a couple months away, thx for your interest and patience, this is harder than we first anticipated.

[Gold Knight]

Im just wondering if this criteria committee is focusing on the the prerequisites to even be considered for nomination, or is putting an importance on certain accomplishments over others, or what exactly their doing as i dont really have a good feel on that yet. I feel that its going to be tough to put a set criteria for some people that should definately be up for a nomination but have different sets of skills. So basically just looking for what the overall objective that's trying to be met.

we really cannot discuss what we are discussing currently

may still be a couple months away, thx for your interest and patience, this is harder than we first anticipated.

1st rule of Criteria Committee - Don't talk about the Criteria Committee

2nd rule...

Good that you are all taking your time though. Rather see it done right if we are going through with it.

[stahrgazer]

Im just wondering if this criteria committee is focusing on the the prerequisites to even be considered for nomination, or is putting an importance on certain accomplishments over others, or what exactly their doing as i dont really have a good feel on that yet. I feel that its going to be tough to put a set criteria for some people that should definately be up for a nomination but have different sets of skills. So basically just looking for what the overall objective that's trying to be met.

we really cannot discuss what we are discussing currently

may still be a couple months away, thx for your interest and patience, this is harder than we first anticipated.

1st rule of Criteria Committee - Don't talk about the Criteria Committee

2nd rule...

Good that you are all taking your time though. Rather see it done right if we are going through with it.

hehehe if all the discussions were public, what would be the point of a committee?

[Robinette]

Im just wondering if this criteria committee is focusing on the the prerequisites to even be considered for nomination, or is putting an importance on certain accomplishments over others, or what exactly their doing as i dont really have a good feel on that yet. I feel that its going to be tough to put a set criteria for some people that should definately be up for a nomination but have different sets of skills. So basically just looking for what the overall objective that's trying to be met.

we really cannot discuss what we are discussing currently

may still be a couple months away, thx for your interest and patience, this is harder than we first anticipated.

1st rule of Criteria Committee - Don't talk about the Criteria Committee

2nd rule...

Good that you are all taking your time though. Rather see it done right if we are going through with it.

hehehe if all the discussions were public, what would be the point of a committee?

[Robinette]

The whole problem here is that you were confusing blitz with too many words...
You need to make a flow chart...
But first... We need to be sure everybody knows how to read a flow chart...

Let's start with you, Blitz...

[Falkomagno]

that's easy

Blitz
AAfitz
Rabbiton
Jrokets
King Herpes
Poo
Sjnap
Fruitcake

That's it

Maybe one of those is a surplus

[Georgerx7di]

A Hall of Fame is definitely an interesting idea, and we'll continue to watch as you, the community, develop your plans and ideas.


--Andy

thx Andy, we are trying to accomplish something of this, maybe we can ask georgerx7di to come in here since he has some newsletter experience.

Hay bud, just read this, although we had talked before. Sorry, I've had a lot going on between the newsletter, our school, and clan war, not to mention real life. That's the main reason I've been kind of non-committal here, just don't know if I'd have the time to put into it to do it right.

Not sure if everything is figured out or not, but here's a though. How about a user-group just to get things going. Invite the 5 or 6 people who have been in this discussion the most and you guys can talk about it there. Or maybe just start mass pming each other to straighten out the details. I don't know if that's actually helpful or not. Anyway, pm me if you want to chat about this, maybe I'll be around more after cla and our clan war are done.

[Blitzaholic]

A Hall of Fame is definitely an interesting idea, and we'll continue to watch as you, the community, develop your plans and ideas.


--Andy

thx Andy, we are trying to accomplish something of this, maybe we can ask georgerx7di to come in here since he has some newsletter experience.

Hay bud, just read this, although we had talked before. Sorry, I've had a lot going on between the newsletter, our school, and clan war, not to mention real life. That's the main reason I've been kind of non-committal here, just don't know if I'd have the time to put into it to do it right.

Not sure if everything is figured out or not, but here's a though. How about a user-group just to get things going. Invite the 5 or 6 people who have been in this discussion the most and you guys can talk about it there. Or maybe just start mass pming each other to straighten out the details. I don't know if that's actually helpful or not. Anyway, pm me if you want to chat about this, maybe I'll be around more after cla and our clan war are done.

thx George, but, we have had a user group now for some time and there is some newsletter staff on the committee. I think you will be just fine in the nominations or selections committee, only can be on one, so you may need to chat with master fenrir and or jpcloet if they decided to split them two up. I am in the dark on where they are at as I am focusing solely on criteria only. Thx for your interest though.

[TheOtherOne]

I believe that there should only be one committee, and a counsel ought to be held to deiced the loose rules governing the nomination. As for the nominations themselves, the people on the committee should do the nominating, kind of like a bill in Congress.

Sorry if this has been presented before, I have not read the whole discussion.

[Georgerx7di]

I believe that there should only be one committee, and a counsel ought to be held to deiced the loose rules governing the nomination. As for the nominations themselves, the people on the committee should do the nominating, kind of like a bill in Congress.

Sorry if this has been presented before, I have not read the whole discussion.

This counsel, would it be kind of like a committee?

[Robinette]

I believe that there should only be one committee, and a counsel ought to be held to deiced the loose rules governing the nomination. As for the nominations themselves, the people on the committee should do the nominating, kind of like a bill in Congress.

Sorry if this has been presented before, I have not read the whole discussion.

This counsel, would it be kind of like a committee?

Well, the truth of the matter is, you would be better served with a quorum, so to speak.
Some of whom are appointed, some elected, and the rest co-opted on a bi-annual basis.

Tony Giardino: "A quorum?"

Police Chief: "Yeah."

[TheOtherOne]

I believe that there should only be one committee, and a counsel ought to be held to deiced the loose rules governing the nomination. As for the nominations themselves, the people on the committee should do the nominating, kind of like a bill in Congress.

Sorry if this has been presented before, I have not read the whole discussion.

This counsel, would it be kind of like a committee?

I agree, the word is ambiguous, but a counsel is more of an event. If we form a committee then an ongoing process of creating, changing, and discarding the qualification of entry into the hall of fame. I believe that a counsel ought to be held, one time, to create a few loose rule that will govern the nominations. And if reform needs to happen, then the counsel may convene again.