The current membership of the AC

Discussion in 'Communications' started by EmpressPalpatine, Jan 26, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: JoinTheSchwarz, LAJ_FETT, Ramza
  1. dp4m Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2001
    star 9
    They're actively being discussed in Mod Squad. People step down, need a change, etc..

    I understand that, but couldn't one of the provisions of Modship be something along the lines of "one-week notice" so that Forums with only one Mod could have someone step in (sure, from what I understand it usually takes more than one week to pick a Mod, but isn't that better than nothing?) when someone is planning on stepping down.
  2. DarthSapient Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Jun 26, 2001
    star 10
    They do give notice and we do our best to sort of backfill those areas. As it stands, the CT has less than 1/3 the activity of AotC or 3SA. It doesn't need to be watched as heavily.
  3. DarthAttorney Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2000
    star 6
    Ah...there seems to be some confusion here that I can quickly clear up.

    The Role Playing Forum under the "Fan Activities" category is currently being looked at for moderation positions while the Games: RPG forum under the Expanded Universe category has yet to attract suuficient traffic to warrant dedicated moderation.

    The two are commonly mistaken for each other.

    :)
  4. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    First off, "permanent" is the wrong description to use. Initially, the "permanent" positions were in fact conceptualized to actually be permanent. However, in practice, this has not been the case. "Permanent" members have stepped down when they realize they are not carrying out their role effectively due to absence, etc. A better name would be "long-term" members - they're in there for a longer term than the termporary terms.

    If they are in there until they step down it's a permanent position.
    Much like a moderator or a Supreme Court justice. The fact is they do not have a term, they have a position that is there until the others either decide to toss that member out or they decide to move on.
    They are Permanent members.

    Permanent AC members have tremendous benefit to both the AC as well as the Modsquad. For several reasons.

    The first is experience - something which in no way should not be discounted when dealing remotely with administrative-related issues. Primarily, it is the long-term members who can effectively and efficiently direct AC members back to prior cases/situations for study.


    This is only the case if the AC members do not take the time to go through the past threads. It's not like there is a huge backlog. if your arguement is that regular aC members fail to go through past threads to see what's happened before, please state so. I know when I was in the AC and mod squad one of my first acts was to slip through the old threads, then again I'm a nosy git.

    It saves a lot of time on everyone's part - mods, AC and therefore the regular users - when there's someone or some people that do have experience.

    Experience in what? Every member, espceilly those in the AC have dealt with the mods.

    It's a part of the diversity of opinion. An experienced opinion - even if I may not agree with it - is something that is valuable to have.

    If you want experience, the AC members can invite ex-mods who have more of the type of experience you claim is important.

    There is nothing wrong with having one or several longer-term members on the AC.

    First they are permanent, second other then vague claims of 'experience' you have no other reason for wanting them there.
    I feel the offset terms would keep new AC members from being overly confused and instead of having clear deliniations between one AC and the next would bring a much more stablity to it as a gradual change instead of just clearing house.

    Finally, the perm members hold to much sway. While a regular memebr can argue for or agaisnt something for a short while, the Perm mebers, if they so choose can use their 'experience' to table discussion or worse encourage new members who agree with them, thus removing the diversity of opinion so neccesary to an advisory council.

    If the decision for the aC is anything like the decision for making a mod, one member can and sometimes does effectively keep one person from consideration by dint of complaining loud and hard about that person.
  5. epic Ex Mod / RSA

    Member Since:
    Jul 4, 1999
    star 7
    i personally see no point in the AC at all. all it does is create more problems, and diversifies the JC populace even further. as Vert has already said, in the ideal situation, the Comms forum SHOULD be the the forum that the AC was initially created for -- that is, to discuss and provide personal opinions on various subjects. however, this forum won't EVER become that as long as the AC remains. how is one to decide, anyway? we should close the AC, and just go back to working out THIS forum. everything that occurs in the AC can occur here. sure, there may be more posts here, more spam, more clutter -- but along with it comes more opinions (and it isn't difficult to know what opinions are warranted and which ones aren't) and also less levels of "power", less statuses that only go to create more confusion and problems. the general populace might like the idea of the AC, but it isn't because it's a way for them to "better" the JC, if selected -- it's just a way for them to feel more powerful and privileged. perhaps some kind of "half way house" before moderatorship. (not saying this is the view of any current, or former ACers -- just the general idea of the concept in general)

    besides the validity of the AC, i don't see any other purpose for this thread. the representation by the DB is completely irrelevant, and the publicising of it seems to be more about promotion rather than general concern.

    and AYBAB is correct in saying that he, like all AC members, has no responcibility to anyone but themselves. the AC may have started out seeking to have members who "represent" the general populace, but this is also a falacy -- how can an individual represent others? an individuals opinion is their own. this is why the AC is largely irrelevant. if mods want to hear opinion, or if members want to raise opinions, then use Comms. i never check the AC because it's only a representation of a couple of posters. why seperate these opinions, albeit by (generally) good posters, from the rest of the community? i see no point.
  6. KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2001
    star 8
    I have to ask, epic, if you read any of the previously stated thoughts about why the AC exists and the problems that Communications sometimes has.

    I'll just repost my thoughts from the first page:

    As a group, I'd say you have some strong sway. I fought hard to keep the AC when its existence was in doubt before AC3. I believed it should be kept because it allows for a great deal of productive discussion with a minimum of drama and counterproductive posts. It does act as a sounding board for moderators, and there were many times in the term of AC3 that the Mod Squad was able to get clear discussion on important issues. It was well organized and maintained.

    Communications is here, of course, and that's good. It allows for discussion for everyone, for better or worse. I like to think the AC is just the better side of things, without much of the negative. That's not to say that there isn't dissenting opinion or negative thoughts. That has existed and no doubt will continue to. However, it has almost always been in constructive form, and good conclusions can be reached. If the AC members are in touch with what's going on in the JC and its various forums, the Mod Squad can get a high amount of information with a low amount of the static that gets in the way.

    I believe Communications and the Advisory Council can and do co-exist without a problem. If a member has an issue they wish to be brought up, they can do it through the Advisory Council. There, it is assured of being discussed in an environment that's certain to be constructive and thoughtful. In Communications, anyone can give their opinion, but issues can become lost amongst the general chatter and other problems that have been known to happen in Communications.

    Both are beneficial and have served the JC well.


    There seems to be an idea that the AC and Communications are mutually exclusive and cannot co-exist. This is mistaken, and they have complemented each other.
  7. FlamingSword Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 2001
    star 6
    farraday: I have found the "permanent" members of the AC to be quite an aid. Yes, I can read through all the old threads in the JC. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to read the all at once. I read a few at a time. And even then I have questions. Talking to an AC member who understands what's going on is more helpful to me than spending 2 hours reading threads to get the same answer. Lazy? I don't think so. It's an effective use of time and a way to build relationships.

    Experience in what? Every member, espceilly those in the AC have dealt with the mods.

    Experience on how the AC worked in the past. They know a ton more about issues than I ever did. It's nice to have someone who has been in the previous AC (which I think did rather well) and who has personal insight on what happened there.

    the Perm mebers, if they so choose can use their 'experience' to table discussion or worse encourage new members who agree with them, thus removing the diversity of opinion so neccesary to an advisory council.

    They don't have that much power. What power does the AC have anyways? The AC discusses issues, and suggest recommendations. There is no voting, so unanimty isn't an issue. In fact, the more the different aspects explored, the better. Differing opinions are fostered in the AC from what I've seen.

    If you have so much trouble with the permanent members of the AC, maybe we should consider putting a term limit on them, say 6 months or a year. That way they are around longer, and yet aren't around forever. But the AC isn't the MS. The AC is an advisory board, not a decision making council.

    EDIT: I'm going to respectfully disagree, epic. And I'm going back to DarthJurists analogy of the mob. The more poeple, the less intelligence. Communications is like the mob. You have everyone's opinions, but you also have drama, everyone giving their voice and input. This is good and should continue. However, it is a lot to sift through and opinions aren't always useful. Hence you have the AC. The AC is is a small group of members who have been asked to server because of their common sense and rationality (hopefully). A smaller group can more easily discuss issues. They can act like a sounding board for the mods on opinions as well as members themselves. The AC can discuss it and offer their recommendation but that doesn't mean you can't go to comms as well. The AC could be a useful tool in working out something so that it is more clearly presented when you do bring it to comms.
  8. Master Salty Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 18, 1999
    star 6
    I'm glad epic had the courage to state his opinion about the AC. I imagine there are MANY more who feel the way he does.
  9. UK Sullustian Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 18, 1998
    star 4
    i never check the AC because it's only a representation of a couple of posters. why seperate these opinions, albeit by (generally) good posters, from the rest of the community? i see no point.

    I feel that this is something that you may like to reconsider. If you get over the initial objections to the concept of the AC, (In a perfect world it wouldn't be needed), and actually actively interact with the Advisory Council members, you will hopefully find them a great deal of help. Perhaps if you asked some of the Moderators who have been using the AC, to see if they find it at all helpful?

    Without your representation for your forum there, you do subtract from the advise and assistance that can be given to your situation, if needed. (and it avoids the unpleasantness of a 800 post Comms thread!)

    UKS
  10. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    The AC doesn't vote?

    Where have you been?
  11. UK Sullustian Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 18, 1998
    star 4
    It voted on your removal, farraday. :) So, it does vote when required.

    UKS
  12. FlamingSword Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 2001
    star 6
    The AC doesn't vote?

    I should have clarified further as to what I meant. AC members don't vote on issues of board policy or members. All they do on that is offer opinions. (Which can be rather strong at times). Discussing and stating opinions is not voting, IMHO.

    They may recommend certain things, but there is never a poll that asks for "yea" or "nay" to an issue. (Should member X be banned? Should mods be limited to 1 year?) Voting for replacements isn't what I meant. Voting for perm members isn't either. But you should know all this. Sorry about the confusion. :)

  13. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    Oui UKS... Quel dommage!

    When I was a mod and brought an issue before the AC I treated it as if it were voting and attempted to sway opinions as such.

    Are you saying I shouldn't have?

    In my opinion, you're giving the mods the right to walk all over you if you refuse to make decisions.

    It's not like Vertical can disband the AC without dealing with more Drama then he's (probably) willing to.
  14. Vertical Former Head Admin

    Member Since:
    Apr 6, 1999
    star 6
    // disbands the AC

    ;)

    No, but I am approaching killing this thread. I understand the concerns some initially had about DB members in the AC, however the Administration was hardly unaware of this, and after having discussed it, we're fine with the selections for this AC, regardless of their off-board affiliations.

    I'm sure one 'positive' change that will come of this thread is that DB'ers won't likely get nominated in the future, simply to avoid the appearance of impropriety...

    Thus, that problem should breed itself out in the next round (even though I don't see it as a "problem", because all of those chosen are solid candidates).

    As far as whether or not the AC is 'effective' and if it should remain? That's likely still up for debate, but I think that may be best discussed in a thread that's not so overwhelmed with emotional baggage.

    Thus, look for a new thread asking for people's opinions of the AC's 'effectiveness' or 'necessity' soon, and look for this one to be locked. I'm happy to discuss this all privately, but I think the initial concern over the DB'ers is nothing to worry about.

    Vertical
  15. epic Ex Mod / RSA

    Member Since:
    Jul 4, 1999
    star 7
    KW, I've read through this entire thread. i may not post much thesedays, but don't mistake that for being uninformed. the basic gist is that the AC and Comms work in essentially the same manner, but the AC, because it has a select number of people, runs better. of course it would! you're only dealing with 6 or so different perspectives instead of the multitude that can be found here. but, to me, it isn't a good enough reason to keep the AC forum when it's essentially serving the exact same purpose as this forum. EVERY post in the AC forum COULD be placed in this forum -- if, in that case, those posts should get overlooked or missed or swallowed up by the rest of the posts (automatically assumed to be bad, or spam, or whatever) then that's a fault of us, the mods. we shouldn't focus on all the opinions -- we should listen to them all, but we don't need to focus on them. instead, like the AC, we should focus on the opinions raised that make valid, decisive points, from the individuals, who, through time and experience, will make themselves known. they don't need, and we don't need to label them with any special award or membership... we should know who are respectable posters, and accept their opinions. however, i don't see how these opinions, even IF they are surrounded by 10 times as many opinions that are unwarranted, need to be segregated into a seperate, secret forum. it's just causing more red tape, and not serving any definitive purpose.

    AC members are individuals, that's all. individuals with individual opinions. opinions that can be posted in this forum, and serve no quantifiable purpose in being posted in a seperate forum. sure, it may be nicer or cleaner, but is it necessary? i can't see how.

    EDIT -- probably should continue this discussion in the next thread, if Vert wants to close this one. I do agree that the necessity of the AC probably deserves its own thread.
  16. Porkins in a Speedo Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 6, 1999
    star 5
    Some members of the offshoot board (of which EP is one), also want the place to return to the "Drama Club", rather then being a rather friendly chatting offshoot which most of us signed up for.

    i don't know what the hell you're talking about since i was not on aim last night, but NO ONE speaks for me. i speak for myself. return of the Drama Club? as in the original purpose of the original Drama Club? i seriously hope that is not what is happening. though i'm sure you're blowing the notion way out of proportion. ...and tessa knows exactly how i feel about drama. hell, i was the one who initiated the changing of teh Base to the "un-drama" club (as in changing the focus from "drama" to FUN) last july, which was the reason why i was made an admin.

    They have instituted this DRAMA rather then perform a Soviet style purge, (which they also discussed), to remove elements that they feel are too friendly with the moderators. (this will soon include Vertical) They can then return to being a "thorn in the administrations side". (?!)

    if you or anyone actually thinks that is why this thread was started then you need help. that entire notion is as ridiculous as it is insulting.

    what I find is unforgivable is the constant misrepresentation of the argument from certain members, as some sort of "Sacrifice for the JC" rather then really being a plot against friends, and the way the "Attack" was planned with such precision.

    OMG! DRAMA! this is just pathetic.



    this propaganda is completely innappropriate and obviously intended for the sole purpose of seeking revenge.


    EDIT: and as i stated in a thread at teh Base: i want nothing to do with any reincarnation of the original DC.
Moderators: JoinTheSchwarz, LAJ_FETT, Ramza
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.