On Sun, 20 Mar 2011, ais523 wrote: > On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 18:29 +0000, Charles Walker wrote: > > I agree with all that, but you seem to be having a debate based on the > > assumption that increasing the number of active players in an > > impossible task. Would it really be that hard? > > Well, the point is that it's entirely plausible, and the sort of thing > you'd expect someone to achieve if they promised they would. However, > there's a chance they'd fail due to elements outside their control.
Honestly, making it absolutely necessary for the officer to get new players is asking for trouble. If nothing else, we could have a recruiter twist eir friend's arms and register, and have a bunch of dead weight quorum-lifting zombies. Two ways: (a) rewards for people who register citing the recruitor and who stay and vote at least a couple times in 30 days; (b) just making it an election issue; if we don't hear about reasonable efforts being done by the recruitor, vote em out. -G.
