Poll: Should we change the name of the Rogov forums?

[Robin Garr]

Posted by request of the community. Please note that THIS poll asks about the title of the forums, not the more extended explanatory material; and that we are talking about the full Rogov forum set, the overall "Rogov's Place" and "Rogov's Wine Forum" and "Rogov's Culinary Corner."

The poll is limited to a simple "yes" or "no". I decided not to list "don't know" or "don't care," as people with those opinions may express them simply by declining to vote. (Also, all may feel free to post responses, if you wish, discussing your vote, although note that another extended conversation is already available on this general topic.)

I have set the poll to allow voters to change their mind, to accommodate the possibility of discussion prompting anyone to re-think.

After this poll is complete, we'll take a look at some separate issues, including re-wording of the explanatory paragraph for each forum.

[Jonathan K]

Thanks Robin. Hopefully we can start moving on and find direction for the forum post-Rogov (obm).

[Yehoshua Werth]

May we see what people want this to be and that we remember who brought this board to us!@

[Robin Garr]

May we see what people want this to be and that we remember who brought this board to us!@

For the record, I don't think anyone - certainly not me - intends to remove Rogov's name from the forums entirely. His memory deserves respect, as a man and as the founder of this community. Even if a majority prefers to change the titles of the forums, I'm in no doubt that the forum descriptions will continue to name him and remember his role.

[Jonathan K]

May we see what people want this to be and that we remember who brought this board to us!@

For the record, I don't think anyone - certainly not me - intends to remove Rogov's name from the forums entirely. His memory deserves respect, as a man and as the founder of this community. Even if a majority prefers to change the titles of the forums, I'm in no doubt that the forum descriptions will continue to name him and remember his role.

I agree. This is a vote to change(or not) the forum names, not a referendum on removing all reference to Rogov.

[Craig Winchell]

As of now, 18 for, 8 against. How long will the poll run? Obviously, we can't run it forever. Also obviously, we can't run it for too short a period, because we want everyone who wants to participate in the poll to vote. So I'd like to request, please that everyone who wishes to vote do so very soon, and I'd like to request Robin to amend the post about the poll and the polling page, to include a timeframe for ending it.

[Robin Garr]

As of now, 18 for, 8 against. How long will the poll run? Obviously, we can't run it forever. Also obviously, we can't run it for too short a period, because we want everyone who wants to participate in the poll to vote. So I'd like to request, please that everyone who wishes to vote do so very soon, and I'd like to request Robin to amend the post about the poll and the polling page, to include a timeframe for ending it.

I left the time open because I want to be intentional about listening to this community and not being an arbitrary administrator, although I absolutely agree that we want to allow sufficient time for everyone to have a vote. I guess I was thinking of a week or so, or until a preference becomes obvious and/or it's clear that no more votes are being added.

So: Reach a consensus, tell me when to turn it off, and that's what we'll do!

At that point, I'll suggest a process for reaching consensus on revised language to describe the forums - language that will include due respect to Rogov - and we'll move on to stage two. And then, I think, we'll be ready to Make It So and move forward.

It's important, though, that everyone be able to be heard. While no conclusion will absolutely satisfy everyone, I'd like to get to a point where no one feels aggrieved about not having had his or her say.

[Adam M]

Hi Robin - Thanks for doing this. I would, however, suggest that you just pick a time on your own to close the polls. If you leave it to us, we'll need a vote, which will certainly spiral this process into perpetuity! My friendly suggestion would be to have the poll open for a solid week, no more...

[Robin Garr]

If you leave it to us, we'll need a vote, which will certainly spiral this process into perpetuity!

Ha! We'll see, Adam! We'll definitely take another look at the one-week point. Wednesday! Or maybe even Monday if the poll is no longer adding new numbers then.

[Sam M]

No .
There is no need to change the title of an event or forum or business because the person has passed. I can see needing to change the title if the person has voluntarily moved on.

[Robin Garr]

It's Monday, the count is 20 to 16 in favor of change, but I'm a little concerned because this seems to represent a division of the house with strong opinions remaining on opposing sides. We could declare it a victory for the Change Faction and go, but frankly, I'm a little concerned that this would seem heavy-handed in light of the vote being close.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Would any of you change your opinion if we worked on the descriptions of the forums first, and then, with that done, revisit the name-change question?

[Yehoshua Werth]

It was 8 against & 18 For change
now it is
16 Against & 20 for name change

seems as though many who wanted the name change voted first and now people who are thinking it through and moving slower are voting to keep the name.. Yet I must respect all opinions

Descriptions sounds good to me and yes the vote is very close.. seems like we have more people on this board who are needing to vote yet maybe taking too long.

[Mike Alex]

We should not change the names

[Adam M]

Robin - One way to look at this is that the early voters are the most active, and the majority of them were clearly in favor of a name change. The votes straggling in over the last few days were seemingly (although I'd wager probably) placed by less active members. So I would argue that greater weight should be placed on the most active members (e.g., someone who has 2 posts in total should definitely have a voice, but shouldn't be able to sway a poll, especially one that is tilted the other way by the majority of very active forumites).

Tough call, but I think a vote is a vote.

US presidential elections are always close. It's called polarization

[Yossie Horwitz]

The forum serves a large group of people, not just those most active here and should take into consideration everyone who is registered. As to the "reasons" behind the voting pace, maybe the first voters were more sure about their decision and those that came later took time to think about it based on the various discussions in the other threads. We could analyze the voting stream in many different ways. I agree with Robin that changing the name shouldn't be decided on a small margin. Not sure what the right answer is here - maybe we should require a larger majority to decide (66-75%)?

[Craig Winchell]

I think a simple majority- otherwise, the rules should have been spelled out in advance. Personally, it doesn't much matter to me. I voted for the change, but I 'm pretty much on the line and could abstain if necessary. However, once all the abstentions for the sake of fair play have taken place, I think it should go by simple majority.

[Yossie Horwitz]

Not sure what difference it makes whether the rules should have been set out in advance unless you think it would have influenced anyone's voting?

[Jonathan K]

Geez, I feel like I am at a shul board meeting.

Not sure if this is attempting to do the impossible, but would (almost) everybody be happy with leaving Rogov's name on the forum but changing the description?
Something like:
Israeli/International/Kosher Forum- in memory of founder Daniel Rogov
Wine Forum
Culinary Forum

Otherwise I vote to cut off the voting and go with the majority rather than continue the discussion on what the votes mean and whether we should have super-majorities to make the decision. Respectfully.

[Gabriel Geller]

Geez, I feel like I am at a shul board meeting.

Totally. IMHO a majority is a majority, whether 75% or 51%. This ain't a game. We asked for a vote, we got it. Now it's up to Robin to decide when the poll should be closed and the result be announced.

[Adam M]

maybe the first voters were more sure about their decision and those that came later took time to think about it based on the various discussions in the other threads.

Hey Yossie - very funny, as if we are toiling over whether to vote for certain badly needed though badly painful austerity measures

I agree with Jonathan's sentiment that we shouldn't over-lawyer this .

[Robin Garr]

Now it's up to Robin to decide when the poll should be closed and the result be announced.

The buck stops here, eh? Okay, I'm in the midst of grad school finals at the moment - in a curious coincidence I've been wrapped up in a final paper on Biblical Hebrew today.

Give me a couple of days to get clear of all this, and I'll try to come up with a Solomonic proposal to discuss as we move to the next stage. I do think keeping Rogov's name and memory in a prominent place is still mandatory.

[Philip Aron]

So what counts the most ,ie, is baal ha de"ah more important than the majority vote. In plain English does the majority vote carry the day or does the owner decide no matter what ? If its the latter, why go through the motions of voting ?

[Mike_F]

Functioning democracies usually have some built-in safeguards so that they do not become a "tyranny of the majority". And with all due respect to the extremely loud voices on one side of this question, when a vote is this close it would seem to be beneficial to find a reasonable middle of the road solution, which is what I think Robin meant by his last post.

[Philip Aron]

Seems to me that some people confuse the issue by not being able to differentiate between a VOTE and a POLL.

A poll is simply meant to establish a trend and a vote is meant to quantify the magnitude of that trend. Its the actual vote that should determine the outcome if we are acting in a democratic spirit.