Advisory Council-Needed or Unnecessary

Gandolf...
Well, the price is quadruple if they have some arbitrary electronic format they require you to follow and keep sending it back over irrelevent, piddly-squat deviations from that format.

 

No offense to the mods or AC members, but we're dominating this thread. If this is truly about the boards, let's hear what the majority of folks outside of our group has to say. I would think that matters even more than what we think. If they see no value in it, I'd like to know.

 

Im not AC



I will simply say I feel that the AC works, is a great benefit, and can only get better. The more the Mods tap into the resource (Which was happening more just during the time I was there), the better.

 

Speaking from my own POV, I have a hard time seeing what exactly the AC does to help out the JC. It is fine and well to post an update and say "this week we discussed X" and what the consensus was and such, however, I am not certain that whatever was discussed was acurately represented by the people. For example, if the topic was mushrooms on pizza and the consensus says, yes we like mushrooms on pizza and it is posted in the update, how does this affect me? Perhaps not as much as a decision like 'Banned people can use the PM feature.' But, I think I had just about the same influence on either decision - none.

I just dont see how the AC represents the users when I have never seen an AC discussion thread anyplace. Maybe something like - AC Dsicussion in progress, Currently 'Mushrooms on Pizza?' They anyone who likes or dislikes it can have their voice heard.

However, this opens up the argument of time, redundancy, and people who post things like 'I agree, kthxbye.' I cannot help but wonder, if there is no place for that to happen, when are we going to get a true opinion of the users?

Maybe an AC polling thread? Maybe there is a set time where the polls will be opened, and users can go there and make their decision on something, and then the AC will be able to take the results to the Admin.

But wait, would that not make the AC redundant in a way? I mean, could not the Admin get the results for themselves? Or are we saying that we do not trust the admin to act like adults? Is the purpose of the AC to be the 'people's police?' I think it is, but only when used that way - which is a bad idea IMHO.

So, getting back to the original point here, I have seen nothing that leads me to believe that the AC serves any function that is not superfluous to an already exsisting process.

Of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Master Mishima

PS - I also don't think that Carthage should have been destroyed.

 

In my view, I feel that the AC is necessary on the following aspects:

*They are here to help support the mods in their day-to-day duties. I feel that mods and admins get so overburdened at times that the potential for burnout is indeed a possibility. The AC, in my view, can help the admin by pointing out aspects of forums that need to be worked on, resolved, improved, discussed, etc.

*Their input is meant to be a differing span of opinions on the JC. I read the other thread about the composition of the current AC and have no problem with it. As long as the AC is here to make suggestions, opinions and give thoughtful ideas in a honest, respectful fashion, then the AC is doing its job.

*The AC is necessary to help the mods in getting feedback. I know I mentioned this before; however, sometimes people will be afraid to go to the mods and suggest their opinions and may go to the AC member and give them their input, which in turn the AC member can relay to the mods and admins.

I still have not had much of a chance to work with the AC personally, since I've only been here almost four months now, but I feel that their opinions are respected, they are fairly recognizable members of the JC, and are generally approachable. Being a conduit between the regular users and the MS is what I feel that the AC should be. And I hope to see this happen in the months ahead.

~Pada915

 

I agree with cbjedi on the representation issue.

People usually find out that your on the AC because you post. If there are no AC members post in a particular forum (or 5, or 6 or whatever) I think the success of the AC is lessened.

 

I just dont see how the AC represents the users when I have never seen an AC discussion thread anyplace. Maybe something like - AC Dsicussion in progress, Currently 'Mushrooms on Pizza?' They anyone who likes or dislikes it can have their voice heard.

You mean like the point of discussion at the end of every AC update? Where people not in the AC can discuss there views. Or am I reading you wrong?

 

Nobody on the AC contributes much to either the AOTC, 3SA, NSA, or the TPM forum.

Also, don't forget EU Lit and EUC as the other half of the equation. There's also likely to be very little overlap between EU posters and Movie Forum posters.

Maybe the AC would be a place for people of each ilk get to "mingle" with one another more.

 

I agree AC members should be posting in a variety of forums. The thing I notice about this thread is the fact we have opposing viewpoints but are able to discuss them in an intelligent manner. The thread proves that Comms can be a success. This issue could've easily been brought up in the MS or AC, but instead it was put here. This thread is a plus for the people that don't think the AC is necessary in my opinion.

 

"For example, if the topic was mushrooms on pizza and the consensus says, yes we like mushrooms on pizza and it is posted in the update, how does this affect me? Perhaps not as much as a decision like 'Banned people can use the PM feature.' But, I think I had just about the same influence on either decision - none."

What if you were to PM an AC member about your views on mushrooms on pizza? It's been said a thousand times, but if anyone has a concern they think needs to be addressed, then we're here. I understand that since you can't see the discussion it may be hard to believe that we are taking into consideration what you say. We are.

There needs to be trust between you and us for this to work. We are trying to earn this trust, and if there's any way to show it more clearly, then by all means tell us.


"I mean, could not the Admin get the results for themselves? Or are we saying that we do not trust the admin to act like adults?"

No, but even if they are capable adults, that does not invalidate a need for advice. One may be an astounding pianist, but that doesn't make the critics redundant.

"If there are no AC members post in a particular forum (or 5, or 6 or whatever) I think the success of the AC is lessened."

I agree. These things take time, but coverage of the forums is definitely something that we can improve on in terms of actually taking part as a regular member, not just lurking.

 

I disagree.

One thread does not prove anything.

 

It's a step in the right direction.

 

I agree with Jeff and Vertical and whoever else is of the opinion that, in an ideal JC, the AC wouldn't be needed. I'd much prefer if Comms would be utilized the way it could be, if mods would bring board-wide issues (that don't require security for whatever reason) to the masses. But until (if) that happens, I think the AC is (a) necessary (evil).

Amazing.

 

Your're right, it is a step in the right direction.

But I don't think it's anything lasting.

But maybe I'm just a pessimist.


I think the AC is still necessary despite this thread.

 

It's all good Sparky. I respect your opinion and I'm sure you know that.

 

The problem with a private board is those that have never joined in cannot accurately judge how neccessary or unneccessary it really is. I think most people know what's supposed to happen but there's this level of perception of what really goes on. Prior to being on I agreed with it in theory but never knew how it worked in practice. Now that I've been on it and seen it frist hand over all I'm 90% satisfied with how it works out in practice although it's far from perfect as well.

All I can say is if the Mods see it as useful then I think it's at least halfway successful. I think they get a better read on policy when it's a little more intimate.

I think beyond that and what the 12 members are able to come up with on their own to address to the mods, the AC's neccessity is determined by everyone's participation. If you don't utilize something then it's not neccessary.

Perhaps more attention should be paid to the forums the members post to when nominated to make sure every one is covered. Public voting is a bad idea, and might be more of a popularity contest than a choice for whom best can help the JC.

 

I agree the AC is useful. They can act as a sounding board for the admin.

However, as an average JC user, I don't see much of what the AC does, and only infrequently notice their posting. Is there some way we could have a thread or board dedicated to user/AC communication; a place for users to come to and ask questions of the AC or whatever.

 

Oh, I have to agree public voting is the biggest mistake they could make. Few people dont bother to take it serious, and a serial troll and spammer is voted in.

 

"However, as an average JC user, I don't see much of what the AC does, and only infrequently notice their posting. Is there some way we could have a thread or board dedicated to user/AC communication; a place for users to come to and ask questions of the AC or whatever."

I think another Comms-style forum would be superfluous. But, as has been said so many times, PM any of us and ask any questions about anything you want.

Amazing.

 

Right back at you Salty.

 

tenorjedi...
"All I can say is if the Mods see it as useful then I think it's at least halfway successful."

And add that to the opinion that if users see it as useful then I think it's at least halfway successful.

So, evidently, it's 100% successful.

It's win-win.

Those who believe that Comms and/or PM's to mods are the better way to do things can do things their better way.

Those who believe that the AC is a better way to get their point across can do it through the AC.

Comms showed there was a need for something like the AC. So, until Comms shows there's no longer any need, it doesn't hurt anyone to keep it around.

 

Certainly you don't need to be a mod to know who is a good poster in the TPM forum and who isn't. But the key to finding a good AC member who will participate in discussions on policy is finding someone who really cares about policy. So Q-S would know better than anyone else who in that forum cares most about policy and improving said forum, as he most likely receives pm's from the members in that forum who notify him about redundant threads, flaming, spamming and whatever else. So while for example Quixotic-Sith shouldn't have final say in who would represent the TPM forum in the AC, he could simply state that user X helps him alot in that forum, and might make a good addition.

That's an interesting observation that I've never considered, cb.

 

cb...
"I don't know how the AC has been chosen in this time, but if I remember correctly after the first AC very little if any mod input was offered or asked for, and that IMHO is ignoring a valuable resource."

Well when it came time to add members to AC3, I made the following plea...

"Have you given much thought to the forum demographics in terms of your members?

It was generally decided in the beginning that representation for all of the forums would try to be accomodated, with bias to the more active ones.

Are there any forums lacking representation currently? That might be a possible first step to deciding any new position.

While it's good to have very active people, stacking the council with say half your members whose most active forums are either YJCC or Communications (for example) might not be good overall."

I was happy to say that I received replies from a majority of the then-current AC members that they had given the matter of forum coverage due consideration.

Forum coverage is a consideration, and will always be. But, it's a responsibility the AC can and should be trusted with handling.

 

What if you were to PM an AC member about your views on mushrooms on pizza?

Therein lies the problem. The average user has no way in knowing what the AC is discussing, until after it has happened, and if it makes it into the update. Sure there might be a coincidence and the PM and the discussion could take place at the same time, but if the user PMs after an unreadable 'decision' has been made, then really, what can be accomplished?

I think that a reform to Communications is necessary. Perhaps have the AC act more in Communications. Users can bring up topics for the public to see, and the AC can comment both in here, and in their private forum. But they can also read and participate in the thread(s) here, to get opinions on the people they 'represent', and to keep users updated in a much more real time way.

 

I keep hearing 'PM an AC member to discuss your issues.' And that is a good thing to say. I agree with that statement wholeheartedly, and I also think that it is not a catch-all. If the AC has been notified about a particualr issue and that issue is going to be discussed with the Admin then I think that input need to be given from the users.

And I would say the same thing to ReaperFett's comment: The feedback section of the AC update is a great thing to have. I think is a good opportunity to get that feedback, and I also think it is not a catch-all. I usually observe that one point is brought up for discussion. Is it safe to assume that either there are no other open topics, or that only one is posted at a time?

My point on those matters were that while they are good things to have, is there anything else that might be done sifferently to encourage users to have their voice heard?

And I agree with ReaperFett on the Polling issue - that was only an example.

Master Mishima

PS - If Carthage was to be destroyed, it probably was best that the Romans did it. Now me, I'd have gone Ric Flair on them (the Romans) I'd been like, "Arrrgh!" and "Whooo!" and that would have learned 'em.