On governance
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-12-2011, 03:08 PM
RE: On governance
Major issue as I see it is that Stark and other mods need to have fun. Job's getting bigger as more and more people join. Need to appoint more mods, hierarchy so that (a) mod job is split and not so big for one guy (b) in the event of dispute there is a clear chain of appeal.

Basic rule for life - don't work too hard. If the job's bigger than one person, then regardless, we need to get more people involved. I think change incrementally - gradually appoint more mods, keep Stark as the ultimate mod, king of the castle, but allow lesser mods to e.g. approve new users, ban, whatever, but with right of appeal to mods higher up the tree for anyone who feels aggrieved? Might be getting too legalistic?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2011, 03:15 PM
RE: On governance
That's the basic approach Moron (that sounds awkward =p). The problem with that one though is who will step up when it come to that. I'm not really online enough to take on heavy responsibilities, and a few members have taken on moderator tasks. it's a bit of a toughie deciding who will do what and whether or not they are doing it effectively after they start. Usually when you bring in a problem solving squad it ends up mainly being a blame shift. Certain problems will happen no matter what, so we can't just choose who will have no fun in the future. Most forums I've been to see this solution, but what it turns into is people being appointed and then leaving due to the extra responsibility.

It's really hard to get these things right. Though I'd say if we need a resident banner Lucradis would never tire of it =p

Whoever takes charge is going to deal with the whiners, that can't be avoided. We just have to make sure that stark enjoys the forum enough to put up with them.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Lilith Pride's post
06-12-2011, 03:21 PM
RE: On governance
(06-12-2011 03:15 PM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  That's the basic approach Moron (that sounds awkward =p). The problem with that one though is who will step up when it come to that. I'm not really online enough to take on heavy responsibilities, and a few members have taken on moderator tasks. it's a bit of a toughie deciding who will do what and whether or not they are doing it effectively after they start. Usually when you bring in a problem solving squad it ends up mainly being a blame shift. Certain problems will happen no matter what, so we can't just choose who will have no fun in the future. Most forums I've been to see this solution, but what it turns into is people being appointed and then leaving due to the extra responsibility.

It's really hard to get these things right. Though I'd say if we need a resident banner Lucradis would never tire of it =p

Whoever takes charge is going to deal with the whiners, that can't be avoided. We just have to make sure that stark enjoys the forum enough to put up with them.

Yeah... um, Moron might be appropriate in this instance Tongue Hadn't thought as far as whether anyone would be keen for the job. I know I wouldn't be...

Any info on what the irksome common jobs specifically are Stark? What jobs could you use help with? I'm thinking maybe rotating sub-mod jobs - schedule 'em, then say every week a new couple of users from the 'trusted' crew are mods for the week? If that week's not good for one guy, he can wheel a deal with someone else to swap? If we all enjoy the forum we should be prepared to help out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2011, 03:29 PM
 
RE: On governance
I really would like to hear, on this thread, from the people who are unhappy with the way things are -- in a constructive way.

How do you see the main problems and what are your suggestions for solving them?

Ranting and letting steam off is OK, for a minute, but then we have to concentrate on solutions and that is the hard part.

I really like Stark's signature in this regard: "Stop battling the problem and start living the solution"

BeardedDude has already made a comment (with only a partial suggestion to resolve the issue -- more may come later), but please, all of you with concerns, grievances and concerns, join in this discussion -- this is your chance to be heard and respectfully listened to. Smile
Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2011, 03:47 PM
RE: On governance
First off, I am not going to participate in the argument from now forward. Anything I say would be divisive rather than constructive and I do not wish to be a part of the splitting of this forum constituency. I do not plan to come back here to participate, but big deal. Let it be one loss. I am sorry I was part of something that would divide the group further. Since I have no power here, stating that I am leaving will have no divisive effect on this group. If I had power or control over groups in this forum, leaving would be a selfish act, or the Christ like thing to do, however you wish to put it.

I hope and have trust that those of you here can make some positive and constructive progress. Some of you are accomplishing this well without divisive tactics. Everyone just take some ground and give some ground and don't just split the group out of pseudo liberty. That's old world. The status quo is not conducive to Thinking Atheists. Try to progress to a better way; make it work. Like Peterkin said, just clean up the shit.

Keep it up and all the best.

Who can turn skies back and begin again?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2011, 03:50 PM
RE: On governance
Here is a thought from another forum:
Add buttons to flag for "spam" and as some version of "manure" - for an S or M marker to appear in the margin next to thread title. That way, people who catch one of these early don't have to go through a notification or complaint procedure; mods can check the thread, without going through private messages, to decide whether it requires action, and other posters who don't want to waste time are warned.

I don't know how big a technical task that would be.
And i don't know whether it would be abused or used stupidly.
Just an idea.

It's not the mean god I have trouble with - it's the people who worship a mean god.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2011, 03:57 PM
RE: On governance
On the matter of stark being able to enjoy posting, Me and hughsie have volunteered previously to do some mod work as we are on when many members wont be due to the time difference. If that eases the workload im more than happy to do it.

One of the reasons i like this forum is you can enjoy yourself, and if stark can't even do that due to workload then it just isnt fair.

Behold the power of the force!
[Image: fgYtjtY.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2011, 04:42 PM
 
RE: On governance
Here are a few quotes from people who expressed concerns (I am sure there are more but these are the few I remember at the moment).

It would be helpful if they joined this conversation and explained (in view of the OP of this thread) how they see the problem and what kind of solution they recommend.

(05-12-2011 03:33 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  Help by all means but surely there are some threads that just don't ring true by virtue of the contadictions that they contain; there are some issues where our intuition may work. Where 'issues' progressively become like something out of a bizarre psycho/sexual sadistic drama I think T.A.F has to draw the line.

(06-12-2011 05:19 AM)Filox Wrote:  Come on people, really? After all this BS and childish facebook nonsense, now they are back?! I am against this, enough is enough, since they all came here I haven't seen any serious posts made by them and most of the "casual" posts are actually their teen problems, dramas and sex interests.

to which FSM_Scot replied:

(06-12-2011 06:40 AM)FSM_scot Wrote:  I can always rely on Filox to say what I was thinking.

(06-12-2011 11:50 AM)defacto7 Wrote:  I've had it... I am out of here. This place has become exactly what you never wanted it to be.

(06-12-2011 11:57 AM)Peterkin Wrote:  It wouldn't have been serious, if all the adults had recognized the sudden influx of juvies and their preferred subject matter: 100% genuine simulated naugahyde. Then it would have been ignored and perhaps subsided, instead of escalating. After the first two, i simply didn't open those dumb threads, and hoped they'd eventually run out of steam.

...to which Kim replied:

(06-12-2011 04:55 PM)kim Wrote:  I agree; I noticed and may have made a comment here or there, but didn't get too bothered by much of it and just left them to their own devices.
Kind of the typical, "boy who cried wolf" situation so some may have felt manipulated or felt they wasted natural care and concern on youthful insincerity. Oh well.
Confused Eventually everyone learns, it's not nice to fool mother nature.

(06-12-2011 12:39 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  ... if you allow anyone to say anything they want and start up a bunch of redundant threads that would be more at home on a facebook wall than a forum, then the site will become so cluttered with stupid shit that people who enjoy it for the seriousness will stop coming back. I have seriously been discouraged by recent activities in the last few weeks that seem to be less geared towards intelligent conversation and more towards "look at me! look at me! I can start a thread and talk about myself here!"

Let me add my own concern here (not a recommendation yet.)

I like the freedom of expression and I don't care what name I am called by whom and I never enter flame wars. I have long believed that if you find it too hot in the kitchen, you can always leave. I never get offended on my, or on anyone else's, behalf.

Having said that, there is one thing that really bothers me and it is people who are INCONSIDERATE of others around them and make the community (intentionally or negligently) less enjoyable.

We should not stand for that. We need to make sure that nobody is cluttering up the forum with spam-like or totally irrelevant chit-chat (about their sex-lives and crushes -- unless they are in need of help and ask for advice -- as opposed to bragging), unless these are quarantined to an area that is not immediately visible on "Today's Posts".

The other concern I have is the legal liability, should the forum be attacked by alleging sexual solicitation or child pornography. Stark may be liable and the Forum may be destroyed and don't you think for a minute that there aren't dozens of theists out there who would not like to do exactly that.

As far as how these concerns can be addressed, I am still waiting for a lot more input before I make my own suggestion.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Zatamon's post
06-12-2011, 04:59 PM
RE: On governance
zat, if the spam like posts were less frequent, i wouldnt have been bothered by them.
Its just when we were getting 3 or 4 new threads a day from the same 3 users about the most pointless of things, thats when it annoyed me. If they were humorous or intelligent in anyway that would be a different story.

We always have some daft threads but they were never so frequent that they were the only thing you would see.

Behold the power of the force!
[Image: fgYtjtY.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes FSM_scot's post
06-12-2011, 04:59 PM
RE: On governance
So far i'm finding this thread really useful to find out what the most important issues are that need working on.. It's so easy to get carried away in the smaller less important details sometimes and ignore the bigger things. So thanks for that!

Keep it coming!

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DeepThought's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: