Senate The EU Senate - Closed by Sith Coup d'etat

Wow. This seems like a bare-bones and scaled down model. Where am I supposed to sit without any furniture?

Edit: Ahhhh, that sure makes me look dumb.

Also, I really think we need to start an archive of past Chancellorships, and when they started-ended, etc.

 

To continue the discussion, it was also thought that a new thread would be more welcoming for people. Thanks Jello!!!!

 

Yay new thread. Okay, now I'm going to jump right into the current topic.

I'm psyched that we're finally talking about this. Pelly brings up excellent points, I'm glad she posted. I have a lot to say on this issue, but I'm going to read through what's already been said more carefully.

I want to stress to my fellow Senators not to be offended or put on the defensive. Take it all in. Think of this as the kind of existential debate which will lead to a better Senate.

 

Very interesting postings to be sure...

Here are my points, short, sweet, and purposefully simple so as to stimulate discussion versus embroiling me in a debate that I have no time to participate in...

I approve of Senate created updates to be copy/pasted in threads

I am skeptical that cliquish perceptions can be demolished. Mindset changes are hard to accomplish.

I am wary of giving Senators more work to do, BUT do not think that the copy/pasting or sticky ideas are that much work

I am skeptical that proper representation can ever take place outside of an oversight body

I approve of Senators keeping their threads more informed

I am skeptical that the Senate can do much outside of games and constitutional revisions

I would enjoy exploring what the Senate could do outside of games and constitutional revisions



-I_H

 

Oh, wait. There's actually stuff I should have been reading? What sort of body is this?

I'll certainly voice my opinion after reading through the last few pages. While I was for keeping the old thread in the interest of preserving history, I hope that this new thread will bring fresh interest into the Senate.

 

*wanders in with a fruit basket*




Err... just a little something from the neighbourhood






*runs away*

 

Thank you, Nemuro. No need to run away though. You're welcome here.

 

Thanks for the fruit basket, Numero.

*Settles into office*

 

IH: OMG you wrote a SHORT post? What have you done with the real IH?

Anyway, I agree with the sentiment and content of your post completely. I'll draw what I see up in more a more detailed form...


Pelly and Cobra are far from being alone in their criticisms, let's just put that out there first. I'll speak on behalf of my thread, the WJFC, where I don't think many of them care about or hold a high opinion of the Senate anymore (and most of them are people who have been very involved in the past). I think this is true for many other threads, as well. I, too, and most of my friends (WJFC or not), share a similar opinion. Many months ago I considered pulling the WJFC out of the Senate because it seemed to us that the whole thing was nonsense and wasn't representing anything for us. So don't dismiss these criticisms, because they're more prevalent than you might think.

So I'm going to lay them out the way I see them, whether they're entirely accurate or not.

1) Too many games. Not that many people care about games.

2) Clique-ish-ness. People in the Senate mostly fall within one group of buddies.

3) Disconnect with the community. Those active in the Senate are basically, whether knowingly or unknowingly, catering to themselves as a group more than they are their threads or the EUC as a whole.

Clearly, all of these criticisms interrelate.

4) The Senate isn't open enough for addressing more practical issues. Where are the boundaries for what problems get attention where and from whom? (A complicated question for a complicated issue.)

5) The Senate is no longer useful.

There's reason to be concerned, to varying degrees, with all of these issues.

To tackle the first three is difficult. There is a core group of people here that put a lot of themselves into the Senate and that isn't a bad thing, but there are consequences. Most significantly, they can seem unapproachable to "outsiders" and their policies and where they put their attention will certainly reflect their personal values and desires.

Now naturally, that's what we consider when electing Chancellors or choosing our Senator, right? Well, in theory, but not entirely in practice. This supposes we have a pretty good system of representation. And we do NOT. We can't or else this place would be bogged down in the kind of practical measures that would make it possible. (We've tried to tackle this before and the Senate simply doesn't work as anything more than a casual body.)

So yes, this is an issue. What the Senate needs to discuss is how they want to address it.

As for the other issues (4 and 5 on my little list), I suggest we tackle this first and then move onto the broader questions.

So some more specific questions to discuss: These relate to things like the games and whether or not the Senate is doing things the EUC at large wants to do... When Senators poll threads for opinions, whether it be for the recent RPG or for electing a Chancellor, who replies? Why do they reply? I've noticed two things specifically here: 1) A lot of people are members of multiple threads, so of course their opinion gets counted many times over. It's another flaw in this whole representation thing. How do we adress that? And 2) Most people who reply are much closer to the "I don't really give a crap" end of the spectrum than the enthusiastic one. Why aren't they excited?

To get some feedback, this is an excellent time for Senators to ask their threads how they really feel about the Senate and what they think the Senate does for them, their thread and the EUC.

So a lot is out on the table right now, but let's try to narrow it down a bit and whoever posts next, I suppose, can decide what we're focusing on.

Edit: I feel like I lost my focus a bit there, but I'm too lazy to fix it, just make of it what you will.

 

I?ll eventually get to all the points, lexu because I think they are important and I agree with some of them, but this appears to be a tl.dr. post already so I'll stop with point 1. Apologies for that, but I am trying to address this misconception about the Senate and show there is a community reason that we started discussing games in the first place.

Point #1: Games

I?m going to look at what has been happening in the Senate in the last 6 months.

During the three months of Jello?s term there were no games. There was a social thread that was opened called Spring Fling. This was Senate Sponsored, but I was the one who came up with the idea and got it approved by the mods before even asking the Senate to help man the ?games?. This could be considered a game. It lasted a week, and was done. Just supposed to be a fun thing.

During the end of Jello?s term and the beginning of Sinre?s term the question was asked of the community as to what they?d like to see more of. ?Games? was the resounding answer that the Senate received. So to say not that many people care about games is contradictory to what we were told by the community over three months ago. Both candidates ran on a platform stating they?d create a game or two.

The EUC Weakest Link was created. Sinre started it off, then handed the reins over to TheLighterSide (not a Senate member), who ran the focus group with the mods, myself, Sinre, and Prenn. We tried out the game during the last several weeks. Most people found it amusing and stated so in the thread. Non-senators played as well as some Senators. We?re in the process of fixing some errors, but Mr44 has asked it to be run again.

The EUCFanFic isn?t a game. No one is playing it, just reading it. Sinre is working on including all the different FC?s from the EUC in it and trying to make it enjoyable for everyone. The original idea asked for many different people to contribute to it, this didn?t happen. Sinre started it off and then asked the Senators to ask their threads if they?d like to write up a FanFic of their own for their thread. The WJFC already has one of these, so it was thought that others might like to do this as well. Some of the FC?s thought it was a good idea, others didn?t.

The EUC RPG, this is still in the discussion stages. It is a hope of the Senate to provide many different things for people to do. If you don?t like the Weakest Link game, perhaps you?d like the RPG. Or if you don?t like that, then something else. We know that games aren?t everyone?s cup of tea. This is why we keep coming up with other ideas.

A risk type game was discussed and shot down as it was pointed out that the last one didn?t work. There was a match game that was started off in test form until the person who came up with it had to leave the net for a little bit. Mr44 asked the Senate to come up with a game to run opposite the Weakest Link (Like they do in the Arena forum) so that?s what the Senate has been trying to do.

I don?t feel as if the Senate is only about games. There is 1 actual game that has come from the Senate.

SWF444?s Caption game is her own game. That is not part of the Senate. The SFD has been around for ages. EUC word association game has been around for awhile, as well as the EUC ABC game. As Typo has said, but I?ll reiterate, the EUCNN is his and not in any way part of the Senate.

 

Well, Jello jumped the gun a little here, but since he's new to the position, I guess we'll have to overlook it for now. There was a locking party planned for the old thread, but I guess we'll just get right down to business....

Did anyone catch who had the 10,000th post?

 

Pelly did.

 

I guess instead of a party, I'll rotate the banner... Winter perhaps?

 

As soon as I clicked on this page, the banner changed.
Freaky.

Winter? Ew.

 

I vote you punish Jello. I volunteer to help. For the record, though, using the Winter banner to punish one person really isn't fair to the rest of us.

Horsey: Yeah, I think this is just kind of a buffet of issues to tackle atm.

At any rate, I'll play the devil's advocate, so bear with me.

If the Senate hasn't been concentrating as much on games, why do you think so many people have that perception? And what else has the Senate done?

I'm going to throw the RPG in there as a game and the Fanfic as close enough that we can keep it in this discussion. Seems to me a fair amount of discussion over the last few months has been about those things, technicalities of games and so forth. Focus groups, Risk, Weakest Link, Fanfic, RPG... There was quite a long time where these took a lot of the Senate's attention, so I can see people having this perception even if the Senate was discussing other things as well.

Now certainly some people are/were interested, but now it seems there were a lot of people who kind of weren't. Were they just not speaking up enough? Or are a lot of these problems of disconnect due to the nature of replies Senators get when they talk to their threads (ie who, why, etc)? Or, do they keep quiet thinking other people can do whatever they want, but at the same time expecting the Senate to be doing something that benefits them?

Further, I think some people might see the kind of response that says "no, we weren't doing games that much" as dismissive, which will just frustrate people more.

Remember, devil's advocate.

 

I agree much of the discussion has been on games, but that is what the administration was told the community wanted. So that was why we did it.

What else has the Senate done?

- Tours, yes they were started under a different Chancellor, but it is still something we've continued. As new FC's are added to the Senate, they are also added to the tours list (if they request to be).
- Discussion, the other part of the tours bill was to have polls or discussions that are senate sponsored, and the EUC participates in them. We had one of the force in which many non-Senators participated.
- Polls, like the above this was part of the bill. This was added, I believe, because some people don't like big drawn out discussions. Polls were an easier way to do this and we created slightly goofy ones with Jello and Sia. (2 polls were done)
- NSO FG. The New Sith Order recently had issues. The Moderators closed it, discussion began in the Senate and was then moved to a Focus Group. The group is coming along nicely and will be ready to go soon.
- We continue to discuss ideas as how to support the community. The Senate may have originally existed to build the community, but it can now exist in the capacity to support it. This takes time to come up with ideas and many people don't feel that they are creative enough to actually come up with ideas. So that's why many different things are discussed, shot down, or approved.
- I believe at the beginning we discussed voting, but I'm not sure anything was agreed upon or changed.

I feel like I'm forgetting something. Its late and I got up early. Sorry if any of this is a little haphazard. I'm sure someone else can chime in if I forgot to mention something.

 

But what you also have to keep in mind that all of this is simply that natural order of things. The EUS is running smoothly at the moment, so the focus is on refining the more fun aspects of the forum. I can confirm the results of the "more games" survey, so the focus has been on designing different kind of games. (well, it wasn't exactly a survey, but that's what people said they wanted.) Not all games are going to work, but that's not a bad thing.

If other people want something else, then they are more than welcome to suggest different aspects. That doesn't mean that every single suggestion can be implimented, but the group has a whole can only work with what is known. No one should be sitting back somewhere lurking for months at a time while feeling like they can't make a suggestion. It doesn't have to build and build until that person feels like they are going to pop.

 

Exactly. So, where's the disconnect happening?

We gage what people want through the Senators and some general browsing. The Senators ask their threads specific questions (eg How about this game?). Now here we get an issue. A few people respond. A lot of people don't. It also tends to be the same people in multiple threads responding the same way.

This is the way representation works here. Is it good enough?

 

It's important to realize that every forum goes through this, but that it is also a two way street. Different people come and go. A dynamic may change. New topics are discussed and forgotten.

Some people like the EUS to be more strict. Others like it to be be more relaxed. Some people are interested in meeting new people, while others want it to stay 2004 forever. Etc..etc..etc.. Like any forum around the boards, this one is made up of the people who comprise it.

That's why, generally, "lurking" is a double edged sword. What I mean is that there is nothing wrong with lurking, but one just has to realize the limitations that come with it. If, as an example, the Chancellor asks about games, and there is a person who doesn't answer either way, the Chancellor isn't purposefully excluding that person, but rather all sorts of different views are collected and mixed together from the people who do. Sometimes, an individual may agree with the decision, other times, an individual may disagree. I don't think that in itself should be a reason for someone not to feel like contributing at all.