FF:NSW CR/RSA

Hey, guys. As you know, I've been made FF Australia's new RSA. I've been told that some people are a little worried about how this will affect NSW, so I thought I'd ask for a general opinion poll. This does NOT mean something has going to happen, it simply means that I am getting opinions on it, and will decided whether there is a need for change based on that.

My question here is this:

I am allowed to remain FFNSW's CR. Do you guys have a problem with this?

This is not a thread about electing a new CR. If there is a need for it, I will start a new thread on that topic, so lets keep that out of there.

This thread is about deciding whether there is a need. There are both pros and cons to having a CR/RSA in one.

People are worried that having two positions on these boards may muck things up a bit - that perhaps being one will affect the way I do the other.

They are also worried that I may not have the time to hold two positions.

Lastly, it would 'give someone else a go' - give another person the opportunity to be CR.


Here are my thoughts on this:

I honestly think being RSA will HELP my CR position, rather than hinder it. I will be able to do exactly the same things, in exactly the same ways. It simply means that I will also have to spend time in the other Australian boards as well. It also means that I can take care of all those things that I would otherwise have to have run to The RSA for.

The time factor. What can I say? I'm a net geek. The only assurances I can give you, are promises, which may not help. Although for those of you who have ICQ or msn, you probably see how often I am on here. As basic time amount runs into the hours, so I don't see a problem.

And lastly, for giving someone else a go. This seems to me not to really be a consideration here. IMO, if you have someone who is doing the job, there is no need to replace them with someone just so another person could have a chance. If that were the way the world worked, I'd have a part in episode 3 by now and one of the actors would be babysitting my brothers.

If we have a CR who is dedicated to their job (which I promise you, I still am), then it would be silly to replace them just so someone else would be able to give it a go too.

However, this is your choice. If you have concerns, raise them, although I ask that if I attempt to respond to these that you listen. As I said, there is nothing at all that is stopping me from doing both jobs, and I hope doing them well. Whether something happens here, however, depends on your opinion instead of mine.

I reiterate: this is not saying we ARE choosing a new CR. It is also not for arguments about whether or not this is a valid thing to do. Nor do I want anyone saying anything against these members, as everyone is allowed to raise concerns.

It is simply asking whether the NSW board as a whole believes there is a need to change things. So lets keep our answers to that for now, shall we?

Edit: Grammar and markup codes.

 

What are you trying to say here? Is someone telling you to quit? Just cause your moving up the foodchain everyone else should too?
Keep the job, you ain't boned it at the moment and don't let people tell you otherwise. If they do, send them in my direction and I'll have something to say to them.

 

Well, if the opinion of a part time NSWFF member counts...

I can only see an advantage in having your CR as the RSA, it's not like the 2 jobs are mutually exclusive, and as she said, Shara is here quite a lot.

If you're looking for a specific reason as to why she should step down, good luck, because as far as CR's go, I've never seen one with such a personal interest in the way things go on this board, she knows and socialises with almost everyone here, and doesn't seek personal gain in her duties.

In short, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

And politics are a sure way of breaking anything.

 

I would like to know why someone asked Shara to step down and "give someone else a go" and if she didn't they would find a way of removing her from the CR position.
Not only now, but about 2 months ago as well. Why employ those sort of tactics?
Don't you people realise that the CR holds no power whatsoever? It's something nice to put on your shelf. Thats it. Any decision the CR makes has to go through Shara anyway. Jeez I'm back for a week and I'm ready to leave again...

 

Ditto what Sith Magician said

SI NON CONFECTVS NON REFICIAT

or words to that effect

 

you [/i]you[/i] believe that you can do both jobs, then thats all i need to hear.

 

So...you're saying this isnt a vote then?

OK, Ill step up as one of the alleged people who "asked Shara to step down." Thats not true at all.

Basically in a conversation a few of us had about the whole thing, a few points were raised about the positions that shara currently held and how we believed there was a conflict of interest. It was agreed that we would talk to Shara about this.

After a long heated discussion last night Shara agreed to put this question to the board, and thats cool. However I think that the points we made to her havent been portrayed entirely clearly, so I will say them again.

1: Was that with Shara holding the RSA job, why couldnt someone else have a go as the cityrep? Doesnt seem to hard to me. However thats only really a minor point.

2: That the 2 jobs are time consuming, and that she may not have time to do both. Now despite what people have said, CR is supposed to be an actual job; The CR is supposed to organise fine detailsof meets and be organising things for the Ep2 premiere that we can do as a group. At least thats what I was led to believe the job entaled. If not, then Drews right; Its an excuse to have colours.

3: That if the CR (Who is also supposed to be the continual moderator, checking when the RSA has all of the Australian boards to mod (as im led to believe) makes a decision that we dont agree with, we cant then take it to the next step in the command chain, because thats the same person. We have to jump higher, and those people will more than likely say "Talk to your RSA."

4: The 2 jobs are kind of mutually exclusive; A CR is supposed tto be very close to people on the forum, and be one of the group, but RSA is a job that needs a little bit of distance so that u have some objectivity.


OK, Ive said what was raised in the discussion that was had. I should add this wasnt all MY idea, it was a decision a few of us came too. And this isnt personal to any of us; We had a concernand raised it. if the majority doesnt see it as a problem, thats fine, we wont push the issue.


OK, Ive said my piece. Im not gonna post in this thread anymore, because its not my job to debate this. Im just raising some questions. If no one else is bothered by it, thats fine with me, it'll be let go.

ok, thats it.
lata

 

damned markup codes and my stupid brain!

Craig, i understand those points. they are valid concerns.

if someone else wants to give the City Rep job a go, for the sake of sharing the position and responsibility around, then come forward and we can discuss it. noone is going to get their knickers in a knot about it.

but so far as whether it will be too much for shara, that is different. if she believes that she can do it, then who are we to question her abilities prematurely? lets give her a go, and see how she does.

 

My couple of cents.

Almost all of the RSA's now are also CR's. None of them have steeped down from their positions, and to put it bluntly, they have a lot more work than an Aussie one does. We have 5 fully established FF's, and there has only been one or two major problems in the last year or so. Most of the other FF regions have about 20 forums at various stages of becoming official, and some of them have had problems every couple of months. Just a little perspective.

Now, the only reason that Shara should step down as being the CR is if it is clear to her and/or us that she can no longer function properly as our CR. I challenge anyone to bring proof of this at this point in time. She has and still does all that a CR should and more.

To address what you've brought up Craig:

4: The 2 jobs are kind of mutually exclusive; A CR is supposed to be very close to people on the forum, and be one of the group, but RSA is a job that needs a little bit of distance so that u have some objectivity.

This is a problem faced by everyone who "works" on these boards, all of the different moderators and also the CR's. The moderators have to be totally objective, yet they also have to be a part of the forum they help, or they can't do what they need to. What makes Shara any different to Brett, Sil, stinky, myself or any of the other mods? We've all seen it here where Shara has had to be objective with some situations.

3: That if the CR (Who is also supposed to be the continual moderator, checking when the RSA has all of the Australian boards to mod (as im led to believe) makes a decision that we dont agree with, we cant then take it to the next step in the command chain, because thats the same person. We have to jump higher, and those people will more than likely say "Talk to your RSA."

Then you go up to Hama and MysterySith, just as you would if there was a problem with the RSA. They know that the RSA and CR are the same person, so they will then deal with it. Please give the Global Support team a little credit.

2: That the 2 jobs are time consuming, and that she may not have time to do both. Now despite what people have said, CR is supposed to be an actual job; The CR is supposed to organise fine details of meets and be organising things for the Ep2 premiere that we can do as a group. At least thats what I was led to believe the job entaled. If not, then Drews right; Its an excuse to have colours.

Yes, that is what a CR should do, and yes it is time consuming. But we've seen that Shara can manage the CR duties, and trusted her there. At the moment, it is her call whether or not she can handle it. If you are convinced that as time goes past that she can't handle both, then bring it up with everyone.

1: Was that with Shara holding the RSA job, why couldnt someone else have a go as the cityrep? Doesnt seem to hard to me. However thats only really a minor point.

Yes, it is a minor point, and it is a really weak reason to ask someone who, no offense to anyone else here, is the best person in this FF chapter for the job.


As I said, a couple of cents. Take it however you wish since this will be one of my last posts for quite a while.

 

I'm curious, why the fuss? Show me exactly where Shara has shown she can't do the job.
Show me where it says she can't do both jobs.
Tell me who you would have put in her place Scream?

To my understanding, you and Jenna were 100% behind Shara being made CR way back when, then came the "Multiple threads on Star Wars" incident where it was quickly revealed that you didn't hold as much sway over her as you may have believed, ever since then, you both have done quite a lot to undermine her as CR, although it has always been in private, away from where ppl may find your true agenda.

You want a CR in place so you can have these boards run the way you want them to be.
For crying out loud, this is supposed to be about a bunch of friends with common interest (Star Wars) coming together to enjoy that mutual interest and find other things you all enjoy doing together, why must there be ppl in any group such as this so hungry for political power that they must destroy any friendship that stands in their way to achieve what they believe is the pinnacle of power?

It's a message board! It's not a new political party, nor is it some secret organisation with plans on taking over the world, although with the way some ppl treat it, sometimes I wonder.

My suggestion is that all this political BS either comes out in the open, or is not discussed at all, otherwise you run the risk of dividing a once friendly group of ppl into 2 camps, and spend all the time that could be spent on planning a kick a** EP2 premiere on political infighting.
Now I regard most, if not all of you, as friends, and it really irks me to see this happening because of 1 or 2 ppl.

As for the RSA remaining "Distant and objective" does that mean she's not allowed to come to meets anymore?
Regardless of whether Shara held both positions, or none, she's an active forum member, and would still be spending as much time here, as well as in other forums.

If anyone has genuine problems with Shara still being CR, or in fact RSA, I also challenge you to come clean, present your gripes either right here, in this thread, or directly to Hama or Mystery Sith.
I'm sure either of those options would be ideal if you indeed had a genuine reason for her not to continue.

If not, then grin & bear it, because beyond personal power gain, there is no good reason at this stage to have her step down.

Time will tell, I say at least give her that.

 

is that really what u think Im doing Sith? garnering power for myself?

Well I cant change your mind on that I spose. I said my piece, and i should add i said it all to Shara first, so this is nothing new to her. Im not trying to be underhanded in this.

And i should add Linda found out about this after me and a few others chatted about it. She had nothing to do with this threads beginning at all.

If u have an issue with me Sith, then say it to me. Go for your life. PM or ICQ me anytime u like. U said we were all friends on this board, and i hope thats true. So if qhat u posted is what u think Im doing, talk to me about it. Coz its not what Im doing at all. And the only way u will believe me is to talk to me.



Damn, I SWORE i wasnt gonna post in this thread again....

 

OK, there has been a lot happening all over the boards and stuff has been said here that isn?t making sense. So I am laying down my thoughts about the whole incident in a straightforward way. Im doing it in this thread because this is where the issues have come to a head. I wont be making comebacks or replies on this because no matter what others say, this is my honest perceptions from this point in time.

This whole issue began several months ago. I had issues with Shara in her cityrep role. I didn?t believe she was doing her job properly. Now there were several reasons for this, and I wont list them all, because the issue has been resolved. One of them, was that I didn?t believe Shara was very accessible to new posters, and didn?t seem as much in the community. At the end she said she could see my point on this. Now there were several points I had that she convinced me where I was wrong, and id even say that was a majority. But at the end of the conversation, and from then on, I felt Shara was a better cityrep. And I stand by that to this day; Shara is a great CR.



Now, yesterday (Fri 22nd) I was talking to some members on the forum at my place. The discussion came up about Shara having the CR and RSA roles. Several points were made by all people that we thought the JOBS were mutually exclusive. Now, it wasn?t we didn?t think Shara was good at either job, it as the jobs combined. Not Shara herself. The 2 jobs.

It was agreed by those of us who spoke, that it wasn?t fair for us to speak behind Shara?s back, and not speak to her. So I said I would chat to her next chance I got. As it happened, it was myself and another forum member who spoke to her last night about it.

The next part was my fault. I don?t communicate well over ICQ, I have trouble putting emotional inflections into points I make, and I don?t present them properly. And when tired I have a shorter temper. Last night, when I brought these points up with Shara, I didn?t think she was listening, but instead thought I was attacking her personally. When we (Me and the person with me) thought Shara was backpedaling we started pushing her, and in the end, stopped listening to her and forced her into opening this thread. That was my fault. I pushed, and s this thread came out badly and Shara was justifiably offended. She spoke to people about this over ICQ, and they got the wrong impression on the whole event.

Now, I was upset that those opinions were made in the open, and not spoken to me about personally. However, that?s the way people chose to address the issue, and that?s their right. Since then, I think its been sorted out, or at least is on the way to being sorted out, and that?s all I can really ask for. But I will clear up the general points now, and hopefully clarify my position.


I have every confidence in Shara as a City rep, and as an RSA. I congratulated her on her proportion recently, and truly mean it. Ill say it again here: Congrats Shara, u deserve it. I nominated her for CR, and think she is doing a good job. As said, I had some issues with her, I raised them with her and its all cool now.

My issues were for the positions of RSA and CR> I believed (and still do0 that the 2 jobs should be given to separate people. I wanted to find out what others in the forum thought about this, and if the community thought that we should maybe give the CR job to someone else. I?ve already stated why, so there?s no need to go over it again. These opinions are for the POSITIONS, not Shara. It is for ANYONES ability to do them, not just hers. ANYONE.


Now; I have no desire for ?power? here. Im happy with the friends I have. I have met most of you personally, and chatted to several more online. I consider u all my friends. We don?t always agree, but then who does? But the point is you KNOW me. Im not manipulating. Im not cajoling. Im not trying to make u all bend to my mighty will. Im simpley being me, and saying things the way I perceive them

 

I've respect everything you say in that post, Craig, and I want to thank you for clarifying these things. I have already spoken to you on what I think about it, and so I do not feel the need to post it here. If anyone finds it relevant to the issue, private message me and I will willingly tell you my side of the story.

As it stands, this thread is about whether you believe NSW needs a new CR. We're not here to debate the positions in general, we're concerned with the forum we are in - NSW. And that's about it, really. Forget the politics, and former hostilities, this time its just about that. If you want me to keep going, then great, I will. And that's the only issue at hand at the moment.

 

my opinion stands as it was earlier. i wasnt judging anyone by anything that was said, so noone needs to explain their position to me.

like i said:
1)if it is simply to give someone else an opportunity, then maybe we should look into it. for no other reason than to share the responsibility around.
2)if we are questioning Sharas ability to do both jobs, then we have to give her an opportunity to try them both. i am sure if she feels its too much for her, then she will step down. i find it a bit unfair to question her abilities without giving her a chance to prove herself.

 

I don't think anyone was questioning my ability to do it, or even saying that I should give it up. I think the original thing was just to find out whether everyone thought the RSA should also be CR IN GENERAL.

But since this is about this forum, then its something that should be discussed in relation to it.

If I am believed capable of continuing to do my job, then I shall do so. But I'll say this now: I don't think we should change things on a whim. If there is no need for the change, then I do not think it worth changing.

Edit: I am not sure people will think it relevant here, but as Kadue said, there are many CR's that are also RSA's, it isn't unheard of. It is common to have people do both without anything but good results for the forums.

As I said, not sure its relevant, but I felt I should mention it.

 

Alright.

Looks like I don't have a lot to say that hasn't already been said.

I'm with Craig. I believe that we should think about seperating the two roles. Especially from the 'chain-of-command' point of view. It might sound presumtuous to say, "What if the CR dosn't agree with something, but since they are also the RSA, you can't take it to them," however, it is easy for us as established members to say, "Well, you'll just have to take it one step higher," but how easy is that for a new member, someone who doesn't yet know the 'politics' of the boards?

Anyway, I'm sick of all the **** that gets flung around. I'm certainly not gunning for the position myself, it's not like I'd get given it anyway.

And that's all I have to say about that.

 

Glad to hear your opinion, Syrix. And I'd like to think we've heard just about the last of all the things that have been going on around here. This board is for Star Wars fans. I think most of us would like to keep it that way.

 

I don't see a problem with keeping it the way it is. But if in a few months down the track it happens to become a problem, you could always hand it over then. Real life responsibilities can limit time on here and so on, it's not unheard of.

Anyway, at the moment I don't think there's any need for anything dramatic.

 

Thank God the point got cleared up, this isn't about Shara personally, but about the two positions or CR and RSA. And I can see how it quickly became personal when it wasn't supposed to. Well handled in the end.

My concern about the CR and RSA being the same person is that they would be taking up 2/3 of the FanForce heirachy. Granted that flattening the heirachy provides more efficient management (who woulda thought uni work would come in handy!), it DOES put pressure on the the person holding those two positions. I say that because of the way the current system works. If a user has a problem with the CR, they go to their RSA. If the problem continues, it goes on to the FF global team. Now if the CR and RSA are the same person, there's a greater pressure and perhaps even concequense on that person to keep everyone on the board happy. If they appear to be unable to fullfil their duty, the global team might come down hard on our CR/RSA (and with recent events, it's not impossible that that might happen, no matter how good the global team is).

I don't know if my point makes sense at all the way I've explained it. Hope it does, cos I thought I had a valid point there.

 

Ki, matters that are brought up with the CR inevitably end up with the RSA anyhow. Also, if Shara believes she can handle the workload, then there is absolutely no reason to forcibly strip her of that position - she has been a fine CR, and will be a fine RSA. There is no problem that needs solving - changing CR can only mean putting someone else in a position that really doesn't need someone else. Remember, a system with too many leaders can easily fall into chaos when someone isn't informed properly, or when something is passed down the chain of command and misinterpreted, misheard, or not even passed along. Just look at parliament.

 

It makes sense, Ki. However from what I can tell of your post, would it not be up to the person having that pressure on them to decide whether they are able to handle it? ?

 

"Remember, a system with too many leaders can easily fall into chaos when someone isn't informed properly, or when something is passed down the chain of command and misinterpreted, misheard, or not even passed along"

I agree whole-heartedly with Gecko, in fact, in light of this infomation I propose that we install Shara at the head of fanforce and cut all the other mods/managers/admins loose. Especially considering other recent events, namely those which led up to this whole discussion.








Ah, yes, sarcasm, the lowest form of wit.

OK, so I'm not going to take this anywhere by baiting people (although, I have seen that method work for some). In anycase, you don't need "too many leaders" for information to be "misinterpreted, misheard, or not even passed along" - you need two.

"There is no problem that needs solving - changing CR can only mean putting someone else in a position that really doesn't need someone else."

I think that this is perhaps the crux of the matter at hand here. You give your opinion, but I will say, "Why doesn't it need someone else?" There is no rule that requires the positions to be filled by one person. It is not a radical idea to have seperate people in each role (nor is it a radical idea vice versa) but apparently it is a radical idea:

a) to let someone else 'have a go'
b) that two jobs are going to be more time consuming than one, no matter how much the two 'compliment' each other
c) that contrary to popular belief, personal bias will always come into play.

After all is said and done there can be only two outcomes:

1) Shara gives up the role of CR for someone else (most probably elected by popular vote). Should this persons fail, or find the role is too much pressure, then I would assume that Shara would regain the position. Otherwise, the system that was designed to work on these boards will, as per its design, work.

2) Shara will keep the role and carry out both duties until such time that she feel she can no longer fulfill the role/roles as she should (for whatever reason).

Either way, Shara has the best chance of landing the role. So what harm is there in offering the position? And should the newly appointed CR fulfill all that is required of them, have we lost anything? Sure, Shara won't have two positions on an internet bulliten board to her name, but she won't have people trying to trip her up.

Obviously my previous input wasn't all I had to say about this.

P.S> Gecko, don't feel that this is all directed at you. It's for everbody's goodness.

 

but she won't have people trying to trip her up.

There you go, why are you trying to trip her up?

 

a) to let someone else 'have a go'
I think we've established agreed that this isn't much of a reason. In both generalisations, and this case, it is simply saying, sure things are working, but lets change them anyway. I don't see any logic in that thinking.

b) that two jobs are going to be more time consuming than one, no matter how much the two 'compliment' each other
However if the person has the time to DO them both, how is this an issue?

THe only real arguement I see there is personal bias, and even that is a non-issue - on anything other than simple and clear cases of breaking the rules, advice is always sought anyway. So as it HAS never been just my opinion on something, it would continue to BE that way.

Remember people: everyone here has the right to their opinion.

 

Um, can I just say one thing....

This is a forum for people to talk about Star Wars. It's a movie. It's not real and the discussions here don't really amount to huge amounts of intellect being used. (obviously no offence to poetic threads, etc) It's all about fun, right?

My advice - and it's coming from someone who has only been posting here for a couple of months and has no interest in the politics of it all - is to not take it too seriously. Obviously there has to be structure and rules, but not a "fun police".

Please everyone lighten up. I can't even read half of the stuff above due to so-and-so isn't doing their job and such-and-such is trying to gain power - listen to yourselves.

As I said, there needs to be order, but not at the expense of enjoying the forum. PLEASE LIGHTEN UP.

BTW, there is no need to reply to my post - I'm only giving my opinion. I'm not entering into this debate as I don't want to have anything to do with the politics.