Advisory Council-Needed or Unnecessary

In reponse to making Comms more productive, we are discussing ways of improving this forum an using it to its full potential.

 

Hopefully, that discussion won't drag on and on and on.

 

I would prefer a lengthy discussion to a rash decision.

Vertical

 

So would I, but people have been calling for this for a long time.

 

I don't want a rash either.

 

So would I, but people have been calling for this for a long time.

Which is why some degree of frustration is understandable. But those calling for this, no matter for how long, should be wanting the best solution, not just a quick solution.

I doubt any of the suggestions on how to improve this place are "overnight" solutions, anyway, so the best thing to do is to be patient, if you can. Demanding a quick response is counterproductive, even if it's understandable.

Vertical

 

The AC should not be there for member concerns - that is what Comms is for.

It is my understanding from recent conversations with AC members that some users don't want to come to Comm because of the drama and/or don't feel comfortable approaching the mods, but might feel comfortable approaching the AC with concerns. I will gladly help in this capicity, though I always encourage people just to talk to the mods themselves (most effictive way to get things done).


You elitest view that only YOU can act efficently is annoying, to say the least.

So noted.


anyone at all: but then again, you are only represesnting your opinion, no?

No.

 

I completely agree with you, but discussions tend to drag on and then get lost when the next important issue comes up. I'm not demanding a solution. I'm hoping this won't get lost in the shuffle.

 

Which is why some degree of frustration is understandable. But those calling for this, no matter for how long, should be wanting the best solution, not just a quick solution.

In business, I've found that important decisions never get made unless a deadline for that decision is set. The mods might consider this, a deadline that is reasonable, not rushed, but that will keep it from being postponed indefinitely. Just a thought.

 

I'm hoping this won't get lost in the shuffle.

Completely understandable, and I agree as well.

I always hoped that the Communications forum could be transformed, thus removing the need for an Advisory Council, and I think that if enough effort and thought is put into a potential 'solution', it can happen.

The responsibility, I feel, is not to be shouldered solely by the Administration, however. Even if they decide that they want to reform the Communications environment, it's going to take effort on the part of the regular participants here to make it a smooth one, as well.

Example: if one of the desires is to reduce the amount of 'public grandstanding' (something I often cited as a plague on this forum), then a potential solution would be to 'forbid' such a thing... Meaning, until people learned to control it, it would have to be editted out (or something like that). This, of course, would cause some 'stink' of its own - people feeling as though they weren't 'grandstanding' and whatnot, and had their posts editted unfairly.

There's no easy solution, but if both parties (members and administration) are committed to bettering this forum, and understand that compromises may need to be made, and concessions granted a bit to the other side of the coin, then it's a realistic goal.

Vertical

 

You're right and hopefully we'll see this come to fruition.

 

Stryphe makes sense. I think the question is is the MS going to be like a well-run business where results are demanded to keep your job, or like the U.N., where it's realized that if they are judged by their results they might fail, so they never have to show results?

I guess that's for another thread, though.

 

Another problem would be that if an admin were to be placed in Comm to enforce the rules as you say Vert, he or she would have to enforce it equally on whoever acted up, be they member, AC, Mod, or Staff.

I don't think the mods are willing to do that.

If you make Comm the place for discussion, you
re going to have to be willing to puish mods who cross the line in proportion to the punishment for members who cross the line.
Is the MS willing to do so?

 

Stryphe makes sense. I think the question is is the MS going to be like a well-run business where results are demanded to keep your job, or like the U.N., where it's realized that if they are judged by their results they might fail, so they never have to show results?

I think expecting it to run like either would be wrong.

I understand it's just an analogy, but it misses a huge piece - Moderating these boards is not a 'job'. It's a volunteer position. Expecting results and meeting deadlines like a well-run business isn't realistic. The desire to keep these forums running smoothly runs strong in some, but not as strong as the need for financial stability, a good social life, and some extra-internet activities.

I'm not trying to offer up excuses for why the Administration might take a long time, I'm only trying to give some perspective (which I know is like a mantra practically - "It's a volunteer position!", but there's truth to it).

The people who volunteer for this site volunteered to first help 'moderate' particular forums, and second to discuss administrative issues.

While I agree that 'fixing Communications' should be a high priority, I think it will (and should) always play second fiddle to making sure the forums are clean, fun, and family friendly.

Bottom line - A slow discussion does not equate to the Administration's not caring, but rather it is a by-product of the circumstances.

Vertical

 

Another problem would be that if an admin were to be placed in Comm to enforce the rules as you say Vert, he or she would have to enforce it equally on whoever acted up, be they member, AC, Mod, or Staff.

I don't think the mods are willing to do that.

I think over the past few months the Moderators have proven quite the opposite - the desire for the removal of any 'double-standards' has never been stronger in the ModSquad, in my opinion. Toleration of rule-bending by moderators isn't accepted, whereas in the past, we were sometimes guilty of simply turning the blind eye. I don't think the problem would be enforcing it, but rather consistantly identifying what to edit.

Vertical

 

All I have to say is I hope that the previous page that discussed possible changes for election processes doesn't get lost in the shuffle, because I really feel we made some progress there and could turn around feelings about the AC, even partially, with some of the suggestions.

 

In business, I've found that important decisions never get made unless a deadline for that decision is set.

Exactly. And that timeline must be adhered to - which could probably implemented in the AC.

Ariana,

The election processes mentioned were:

1) Popularity
2) Mod choice
3) AC choice
4) Forum Choice

-- Only one of them serves us best without hitting on the weaknesses of the AC/JCC/Comm; and that is no.2

 

That's an amazingly condensed and incomplete summary of it and I disagree. I think forum elections could end in popularity contests, but some of the suggestions thrown around were viable.

 

I think forum elections could end in popularity contests, but some of the suggestions thrown around were viable.

Change "could" with "will". With 90% of the general community being children, the high-school mentality is quite abundant.

 

Have you read what we discussed? We came up with some possible options.

 

I understand it's just an analogy, but it misses a huge piece - Moderating these boards is not a 'job'. It's a volunteer position. Expecting results and meeting deadlines like a well-run business isn't realistic. The desire to keep these forums running smoothly runs strong in some, but not as strong as the need for financial stability, a good social life, and some extra-internet activities.

I understand completely, but what we've seen too much of is "we're discussing", with very little "here's the deal". I don't think it's too much to ask to put a deadline on the deliberations. If someone can't get into the discussion in two weeks (or whatever time is set) then it obviously wasn't very important to them. Leave them out of the process and make the decision.

 

ternian, you forgot Teh Randomizer? (and the establishment of criteria and application of it to that random selection process).

 

Election processes:

1) Popularity
2) Mod choice
3) AC choice
4) Forum Choice
5) Random Choices

Cheers, Porkins.

Ariana, could you PLEASE tell me what I have missed or condensed? It's no help to anyone if you make vauge statements.

 

Never mind. Don't worry about it.

 

ternian, you forgot Teh Randomizer?

LMAO!

Didn't someone around here come up with some clever way to get rid of all the mods? M.O.D.B.O.T.??? Does that sound familiar, this was a long time ago...

All your base are belong to M.O.D.B.O.T.