What about a limit on how long Hosts can serve? and other matters

[Make7]

3. I like the idea of changing the number one slot, but...

... isn't the system sort of designed for the top Host to be able to assign (and remove) the other Hosts? The idea being that the Admin didn't necessarily have to get involved with anything other than assigning the top slot and then let the group members handle it from there. I'm not saying it's not possible (perhaps the top Host can remove themselves), but you might want to contact an Admin to see if they'll be agreeable to the idea if they would need to be involved.

I guess I would like some clarity on how the top Host slot can be changed using the software. Can the top Host do it themselves? Or does the Admin need to step in? Can someone with access to the Host forum please see if they can get an answer?
_____

Returning to your first idea: The idea of trying to select brand new Hosts on any time frame may prove to be somewhat contentious. I think if people that are already serving as Hosts could still be voted in for another term that would make things easier.

If people like how someone is Hosting, people could vote for them to continue for another term (hopefully that would happen quite often) and if they want a change, people could vote for someone new. I agree that a group of permanently assigned Hosts is probably not a good idea, but if everyone likes how a particular Host is performing their duties then why not let them continue to serve rather than require a change. (Perhaps that is how you meant it and I am just agreeing with you using lots of words.)

Each person should be required to recommend an even number of persons - half that largely share their viewpoint and half that oppose it.
_____

Another thing that we might want to address is if there should be some qualification for voting. Do the people who post here regularly get to have a louder voice than someone that shows up to vote on Hosts as their very first post down here? I realize this idea could open a big can of worms - but just as you can't get banned from a group you haven't participated in, perhaps you also shouldn't get to vote on Hosts for a group you hadn't participated in.

Since the Hosts will be voted on periodically, people just showing up to vote may not be an important issue once things are up and running for a while as the only people interested in who is Hosting would be those participating - but it may be an issue the first time around. Just something to consider...
_____

As to the number of Hosts, I think six sounds about right. Since not every Host will be logged into DU all the time, we probably need more than just a few so there is someone around most of the time to respond in a timely manner. If we can't even come up with six acceptable Hosts, how will we solve 9/11?