The Advisory Council returns!

JAS, do you simply not believe that they will listen to what we have to say? That if a mod proposal meets with resounding negativity from the AC that they will simply ignore our feedback?

 

What if a conversation or issue extends past one month? Will threads be locked after the old members leave?

¤Night

 

No, I don't believe it. If the mods/admins want to do something, regardless of the wishes of the membership, it will be done. And as far as punishing mods that get out of line, I don't expect to see it happen regardless of the wishes of the advisory council. They will just circle the wagons and maybe slap his hand to placate us, but nothing will be done.

 

I believe new members can pick them up, post in them.

It's like an issue being started one month and then a new user coming into the middle of it right after signing up. It simply provides a new avenue as to how the membership reacts to things.

 

CA needs to edit the first post. It's pretty much been decided that we'll be around for 3 months rather than 1. A time frame of a mere month wouldn't give us much time to get anything worthwhile done.

 

Action has been taken in the past against mods by mods. The last time was December.

 

Why are the threads for the AC being kept private? If they speek for me, surely I should be able to read them so I can tell my "representative" what I think. Why not make the threads open to the public in a read-only format?

Closed door proceedings do not sit well for some of us.

 

three months?!?!
That sounds an awfully long time....

¤Night

 

There have been cases were ideas, suggestions, etc, have been posted in Communications and have been simply brushed aside by the Mods, even locked. I would like to know if Comm will actually be of use once this Conucil starts working.

 

So far, this thread has had much better discussion than anything in the AC.

I'm of the attitude to wait and see. There's no telling if we will be taken seriously or not, or if the AC will be effective or not. I'm giving things a week or two before I pass judgement.

 

I don't see why Comm. would become obsolete. I don't think anyone is saying that members have to come to us with a grievance rather than posting it here. This is just an experiment to make mod/user communication work better.

 

Why are the threads for the AC being kept private? If they speek for me, surely I should be able to read them so I can tell my "representative" what I think. Why not make the threads open to the public in a read-only format?

Vert already touched upon this issue, and he pretty much made it clear that the mods want a more intimate, professional setting in which a small group of manageable members get together and discuss new policy with the administration. The new policy is then taken into consideration and changed as to how this small number of members reacts to it and what suggestions they make.
In effect we're making the final product tested and better for the absolute whole.

However, I'm willing to step in and offer to make up "reports" of what goes in on the forum that will be open for the public to read, much like the current admin reports.

 

We agreed that terms of only one month would cause us to spend half of our time arguing over possible successors. Anything shorter than three months would make it impossible for new members to get used to the Council before they were forced to leave.

 

Also, a read-only forum would require the members to be VIPS to post there. As opposed to a simply private forum where they can be admitted without a promo.

¤Night

 

Besides, if you put the forum out and visible to the public, you'd have the members trying to keep themselves in check because they don't want to offend anyone. In a setting such as that, you've got the right to privacy, and people can speak their mind. Communication improves, and thus so does the board.

 

Wouldn't you end up stepping on each others toes. Someone posts a thread in Communication about something, it's brought up in the AC, Mods now have two threads to deal with. Or will the Comm. thread be closed?

I guess I just want to know what the procedure for this AC will be. Will it be a free-for-all of ideas, or what?

 

• In a setting such as that, you've got the right to privacy, and people can speak their mind.

I should stress that this means members can speak their mind with us. You don't have to be vulgar, but it does mean you can come to us and tell us how you feel.
Do you have problems with a new policy, is some moderator chafing you, are you angry at situations about the Jedi Council Community?

Tell us, and we will make your wishes so.

 

---

No, I don't believe it. If the mods/admins want to do something, regardless of the wishes of the membership, it will be done. And as far as punishing mods that get out of line, I don't expect to see it happen regardless of the wishes of the advisory council. They will just circle the wagons and maybe slap his hand to placate us, but nothing will be done.

---

Not so, although I concede there's no reason for you to really believe this. That's what we're trying to change - that particular perception.

The Communication Forum will hopefully not become obsolete. That was one of my concerns with this idea, as well, but the two forums aren't entirely the same. Each has it's own purpose.

Why isn't it read-only? There might be sensitive discussions going on that simply aren't suitable for public discussion. Surely you can understand that. Just like there are threads in the Mod-Squad that need to remain confidential for certain reasons, there will be similar discussions in the AC.

Vertical

 

I can't say how this will work, but I know how the old AC worked. We argued for or against certain things that came up, we got to speak our minds. The members that were picked for the old AC were picked because they were respected members, and the admins valued their opinions. The adminstration wanted more input on how to make things better, and how to accomplish those things. A well writen argument by one person is much more persuasive than twenty seperate threads by angry members.

 

Well, if you have private conversations that are not accessible to the general populance, and probably not even known by them, how can the AC properly represent the users? Won't they just be representing themselves? Much like we all do here?

 

That's why we're asking you to bring your concerns to us. So we don't end up merely representing ourselves.

 

And what about certain "private" conversations that are not known to the public? Will they be handled in the same way that the Mods deal with their private matters, without imput of the other users? I can see that somethings cannot be brought up outside of these private boards, but I would certainly hope that there would be more open conversations than reserved.

 

Mods/admins/others:

I want to make peace. I am very leary of you. The truth is I think many of you let the modest amount of power you have go to your heads. And I think this place would be much better off if it wasn't being run like we were all kindergarteners and you were the teachers.

But, I see you are trying to make this a better place, even if you are doing it in a way I disapprove of. And I want it to be a better place to, and that is why I am so obstinate and so wary of you and your motives and the way you are doing this. It isn't because I simply think you are all jerks.

But keeping stuff behind closed doors is not the way to go. Simply put, you have decided that these people are our, for lack of a better word, representatives, and yet, by keeping it behind closed door, we only know what we are being spoonfed. How can someone talk for me if I'm not allowed to know what the issue is? I can't tell him what I want him to say for me if I'm not allowed to know what the very issue at hand is. It makes no sense to call them representatives then.

I don't accept the "sensative issues" arguement either. That is blowing stuff out of proportion. The safety of millions is not at risk here, only your control of information. No one will be harmed by our, the members of this board, seeing what you talk about...unless it is something that would be consdiered slanderous or improper in the first place.

The truth is, much of the problem with this board comes from the head down. You treat us like children, you spoonfeed us information, and you let those people who exist to keep us in line run rampant without fear of retribution. There are those members, such as myself, that are highly suspicious of the way this board is run, and much of that suspicion among us is because of your actions.

I am not innocent enough to believe for a moment that you will open the AC board for our viewing. To do so would compromise whatever stranglehold you have on information on this board. But don't think for a minute that I am just going roll over and smile because you ahev thrown us a meaningless bone and that is exactly what this Advisory Council is. It has no other real powers than the Communications board did before. You say it is more formalized, I say it is more exclusive. You say these people talk for me. I say I did not choose them and don't know what they are saying.

Well there is my two cents. Eternal vigilence and all...

 

Oh, and on a annoying note: What use is a Announcements Forum if no one uses it? I'm still wondering what the newest board is (#204)...

Never mind It's Saignaw, MI (http://boards.theforce.net/board.asp?brd=10355)

¤Night

 

---

And what about certain "private" conversations that are not known to the public? Will they be handled in the same way that the Mods deal with their private matters, without imput of the other users?

---

That's the whole point of the forum. We're exposing these "private" conversations to a small sampling of the 'public'. They're not mods. They're not VIPs. They're regular members. We're getting their input. That's also why we're rotating people, so they don't stop thinking like regular members.

Vertical