Roll Call and Rules for Round 3 Sept 21, 2018 15:57:49 GMT
Post by aarvoll (INTJ) on Sept 21, 2018 15:57:49 GMT
Edit: There wasn't enough of a response to this roll call, so we're going to keep it open for a few more day. The start date of the next round is TBD.
If you sign up for either of these groups in a reply to this thread make sure you include the day and time for your checkpoint discussion. Note that for this round members are restricted to either Colloquium or Organization, and may not participate in both. Given our current membership these groups wont be filled up, but we'll have to deal with this until we're prepared to launch some recruitment efforts. We can discuss that sort of thing in the General Project Discussion thread on the main page.
Please reply with the group or groups you'd like to participate in this round-
3. Ken's Rightist Art Research Team
4. Aarvoll's Mission Statement Development Team
Aarvoll's research team will be devoted to creating a concise mission statement, and subsequently advertisements for the project.
Rules for the Round
The Deepright Forum is dedicated to the development of an online academy from a Perennialist perspective.
We seek to provide an engine of integration, drawing particularly on intellectual developments from the right, that allows for the construction of a unified and coherent conservative worldview. Our structure is meritocratic and we reward our most talented researchers and content producers with influence over the form and trajectory of project.
There are three levels of participation:
Organization- This group produces submissions pertaining to the structure of our project, as well as entries addressing a more general philosophy of organization. A winner is chosen by a weighted vote at the end of each round of submissions, at which point the winner becomes the Organizational Director for the next round. The Organizational Director has the authority to amend and improve our structure.
Academic Colloquium- This group has a wide purview, accepting entries on all academic subjects. The posts in this category should be formatted so as to be intelligible on their own grounds; these are to be self contained articles capable of standing alone as blog entries. A winning post from Colloquium is selected at the end of each round and the author of that post becomes an Academic Director. Academic Directors lead research teams on specific topics and are responsible for developing a structure and organizing their team.
Research- Research teams, led by Academic Directors, can vary widely in structure and topic. A new research team is created every round, and they last as long as they successfully recruit members. New members acquire points towards higher rank through participation in research teams.
The six highest ranking members at the time of roll call, which happens at least a day prior to the commencement of a new round, will have priority to enter the Organization round schedule. If any of those members forego their right of ingress this prerogative will pass to the next highest ranked members.
The six highest ranking members at the time of roll call will also have priority access to the Academic Colloquium. A member can choose either Organization or Colloquium, or neither, but not both. *A member may only participate in one or the other of these two schedules.
Members have elective priority of research team participation based on their general ranking. Members who aren't qualified to participate in Organization or Colloquium currently have research as their only option.
An alternate list will be assembled for Organization and Colloquium, such that if a day in either of these schedules is missed an alternate will be allowed to make a submission in its place by the end of the round.
The System of Vote Weighting:
In Organization and Colloquium each member votes for one entry (not their own) from their schedule. Each member's vote counts for the value of points they received the previous round in the same schedule divided by two, plus one point for participation. So if John earned 4 points last round, his vote in the current round would be worth 3 points ( 4/2 + 1= 3 ). The entry that receives the most points wins. Weighted voting is specific to each category, so a higher weighting in Colloquium does not effect vote weight in Organization.
The General System of Ranking:
In a Organization and Colloquium during a single round a fixed number of points are given out through weighted votes. The percentage of these total points received through voting in either Organization or Colloquium by a member will go towards that member's general rank. If John received 30% of the weighted vote in Colloquium then .3 will be added to his general score.
Points are distributed in a Research Team based on the discretion of its Academic Director, the points awarded must sum to 1. At the end of a round each member's points are divided in half, and this value will be added to points for the next round. If John earns .3 points in Colloquium, .2 points in a research team, and had a score of .5 last round then .25 (last rounds score divided by 2) will be added to .3 and .2 yielding a general score of .75. The higher the general score the higher your priority of entry to all categories.
Responsibilities and penalties:
If you are signed up to post an entry on a given day, and you miss your deadline, .05 will be immediately deducted from your general score, however if you submit it before the last entry of your group goes up your post may still be voted on- though no one is then required to submit feedback on your entry.
Everyone in a group is required to post some form of feedback on every on-schedule entry in their group by the end of the second day after each entry goes up. So Monday’s entry should be commented on by all members by the end of the day (11:59PM EST) on Wednesday. If a member fails to post feedback for an entry within this time frame .02 will be deducted from their general score.
Members in Colloquium and Organization during roll call will be required to set a day and time for a checkpoint feedback discussion. The first week of the schedule is prep time, and these checkpoint discussions will take place during that first week. Participation in the feedback discussions of other members grants you .02 toward your general score.
If you use a sabbatical your scores (vote weights for your groups and general score for priority sorting) will be frozen instead of being reduced by half while you take the round off. Every member is given two sabbatical points effective immediately, new members receive two sabbatical points upon entry. If you wish to use one of these points you’ll inform an Organizational Director during his roll call. These points are good for one year, September 1st, 2019 would be the reset date for distributing new Sabbatical points.
Aarvoll will be putting together an email list to deliver important announcements. Message Aarvoll on this forum with an email address- it can be one created specifically for this purpose if you're worried about opsec.
For new members, here’s a video explaining the general schematic- note that this was made prior to round 2 so it doesn't include all current rules:
Schematic for Round 2