|
Post by bombmaniac on Jul 15, 2010 11:01:08 GMT -5
by the way bree, this system does not do away with the admins at all. if you look at system 1, the admins remain exactly as they are, and are selected by the same methods they are selected by now. same with system 3. you get to choose your own team. system 2, where it is only the admins being leaders requires a selection and removal process at the hands of the community, because with dan gone there is no longer a check on the admin team.
not that you people require a check based on what you have been doing now, but there could come a time in the future where you do need a check, and dan can no longer be that check. as such, the community must be that check.
we created this last night as an idea. i don't see what you all are getting worked up about. this thread is merely our observations, and ideas for the future of the tribe. it is not as though we are forcing it on anyone. we'll be posting a poll in 14 days, to see which idea the community likes best, if any at all. if they don't like any...then this will have been one of many rejected ideas on the moon. and by the way, this was in no way intended to shaft the admins. erin was present as we were making this post, so you can't complain about not being represented in this process.
this is a radical idea, and it may seem a bit extreme, but we just officially lost Dan, and that's extreme as well.
as for people's contentions that this was made by a few people who are just extreme...discuss the ideas. if you see these ideas as to extreme, come up with viable ideas on how to change it, post them here, or message us and it will be changed. or better yet, post your ideas on how we should proceed from here. unless of course you like these ideas...
|
|
|
Post by Breepop on Jul 15, 2010 11:25:01 GMT -5
by the way bree, this system does not do away with the admins at all. if you look at system 1, the admins remain exactly as they are, and are selected by the same methods they are selected by now. same with system 3. you get to choose your own team. system 2, where it is only the admins being leaders requires a selection and removal process at the hands of the community, because with dan gone there is no longer a check on the admin team. not that you people require a check based on what you have been doing now, but there could come a time in the future where you do need a check, and dan can no longer be that check. as such, the community must be that check. we created this last night as an idea. i don't see what you all are getting worked up about. this thread is merely our observations, and ideas for the future of the tribe. it is not as though we are forcing it on anyone. we'll be posting a poll in 14 days, to see which idea the community likes best, if any at all. if they don't like any...then this will have been one of many rejected ideas on the moon. and by the way, this was in no way intended to shaft the admins. erin was present as we were making this post, so you can't complain about not being represented in this process. this is a radical idea, and it may seem a bit extreme, but we just officially lost Dan, and that's extreme as well. as for people's contentions that this was made by a few people who are just extreme...discuss the ideas. if you see these ideas as to extreme, come up with viable ideas on how to change it, post them here, or message us and it will be changed. or better yet, post your ideas on how we should proceed from here. unless of course you like these ideas... "Doing away with the admins" is not even close to my only concern. My biggest concern is you turning a place I love into a bureaucratic, heartless mess when it's not wanted or needed. Also, I agree that the admins need a check... but holy SHIRT, with people like you around, how do we not have a check? lol Um, you guys certainly did not convey it like it was just an idea or suggestion. You conveyed it like "WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING, AND THIS IS HOW IT'S GOING TO BE, LIKE IT OR NOT. THERE ARE NO OTHER SOLUTIONS." At least, that's the vibe I got from it. It left absolutely no room for any ideas that were completely different. It left absolutely no room for any other opinions. That's not okay. That's why people are getting worked up. And I still don't think the forum government should officially be discussed in this thread. It's not fair to other ideas and opinions to have your abrasive suggestion in the limelight. I'll make another thread later this afternoon (gotta go take a final) if someone doesn't beat me to the punch. Since you guys seem so adamant about discussing our forum's government, lets get to discussing. I'm ready! : D
|
|
|
Post by penguinpalsrkewl on Jul 15, 2010 11:28:17 GMT -5
we just officially lost Dan, and that's extreme as well. We just officially lost Dan? I thought... he was slowly going away and we were all completely aware of this from the beginning. Or maybe it's just me. But just saying. I didn't mean to sound too defensive (if that's what it is) and again, I'm totally up for discussion for this. Someone else initiate and I'll add on. That's what I'm good at.
|
|
|
Post by zAkAtAk on Jul 15, 2010 11:29:15 GMT -5
Please see point #2 and point #4.
bomb, if you seriously want to do something, let's create our own forum along with people that are willing.
|
|
|
Post by newschooled on Jul 15, 2010 11:31:24 GMT -5
Bree: Me: (Obscure 'Cleveland Show' reference) THAT'S WHAT I WAS TELLIN YOU BEFO'!!!Edit: I don't agree with Bree that often, but in this case, she stole the words right out of my mouth )
|
|
kovac
Moon
I am the Alpha and the Omega.
Posts: 161
|
Post by kovac on Jul 15, 2010 11:37:44 GMT -5
i always wondered if Anarchy would work...i guess not...
|
|
Cortney
Star
[AWD:0c15]The Objectioner
The Bown
Posts: 885
|
Post by Cortney on Jul 15, 2010 11:38:56 GMT -5
Hi.
The only reason Dan was our leader is because he made and endorsed the forum. Think about the past month or so - have you seen much of Dan on the forum? No, you haven't. I'm not attacking Dan by saying this, I'm saying that the admins and natural leaders within the community have been the ringmasters here for a while, but nobody noticed until Dan actually said it. Which is silly. BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT.
The impression I get from this thread is that we have to choose one of those three systems, vote on it, and it's going to be implemented. Uh, no thanks? A group of 4-6 people made this thread (or at least, that's the impression I get), and we're a community of about 100-150 active members. To honestly believe that you can force us to choose one of this systems is beyond foolish.
I think the leadership we have now is fine / on the verge of being fine. Once we get the admin team straightened out, plus we also have natural leaders within the community (Like Bree's example, Chelsea), we'll be good to go. Admins are given official powers and pretty names, but that doesn't mean much. People will listen to the natural leaders. The reason Dan's voice had so much weight is because people already admired and respected him (not necessarily in a fanboy fashion). This same weight will be given to the voice of natural leaders within the community.
But, purely in response to the systems you "suggested," I disagree with every last one of them (and I would if I was a regular member, so don't pull that "OH SHE'S AN ADMIN THAT'S WHY SHE THINKS THIS BLAH BLAH"). They reek of bureaucracy, and I hate that. It's a forced, cold-hearted government, and I'm not going to be a part of it / be ruled by it.
No.
|
|
|
Post by newschooled on Jul 15, 2010 11:47:42 GMT -5
I think what's being pushed for here will inevitably turn into an entertainingly complex clusterfuck of so called "leadership". The problem with governance is that it's impossible to strike a balance that pleases everyone. And then we'll just be going in circles again.
That, and it's an open forum. Did I mention the word 'open forum'? Heavy governance from a very small circle of individuals is gonna destroy that, and then we're just left with politics.
|
|
|
Post by Benyamin on Jul 15, 2010 11:57:29 GMT -5
Hmmm... all my points have already been stated... oh well This was made by a few people, not the tribe (I think we should put on the wiki and edit majorly) I think the admins are fine where they are, we don't need an official council. This is way too formal. We need to form a loose forum government. yeahh...
|
|
|
Post by zAkAtAk on Jul 15, 2010 12:03:56 GMT -5
I love how this thread turned from somewhat of a debate to a rally.
WHAT DO WE THINK ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING!?!?!?!
(audience) BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
|
|
ItsCarterYo
Moon
[AWD:09080302]
Otters rock...
Posts: 285
|
Post by ItsCarterYo on Jul 15, 2010 12:03:11 GMT -5
I have nothing intelligent to say except that I think it's a lil extreme and would make the forum less fun. I know having fun isn't your main goal but your should try it some time. Yeah. I think Courtney is right.
|
|
|
Post by bombmaniac on Jul 15, 2010 12:25:14 GMT -5
by the way, there are 3 systems proposed. for the least bureaucratic system...i give you...system 1. for middle...i give you system 2. for the MOST bureaucratic, and complicated...we have...DINGDINGDING!!!! system 3.
|
|
|
Post by bombmaniac on Jul 15, 2010 12:27:38 GMT -5
personally i'm leaning toward system 1...i mean its simple...find a person to replace dan, someone the tribe trusts, someone with vision, and someone who can pick up where dan left off...everything else would stay the same...and the tribe would choose it's leader. you'll notice i made it rather difficult but not impossible to remove this leader, so if things got bad, the leader could be removed.
|
|
theeverbored
Meteor
if a nerd has no avatar, does she still have a face?
Posts: 81
|
Post by theeverbored on Jul 15, 2010 12:35:40 GMT -5
Really people this is supposed to start more brainstorming... So the ideas purposed are too strict? What would you change? I'm sure there's one of the 3 systems that could be edited into something you would like to see here. The whole point of this thread is that people would have somewhere to jump off from. This is just the building point.
As for it being too controlling, when you think about it the admins have total control of the forum right now. How is that less controlling then having everyone vote?
Obviously when talking about "government" it sounds cold and harsh, but the system we have now could be written down the same way. We need organization to make the free thinkers free to think. There needs to be some sort of organization between leaders so that the menial stuff like trolls, or the major stuff like group direction, can be done with as many people agreeing on the decision.
It's not as fun as cooking up new ideas but the hope is that some basic structure will make SPOTM run more smoothly, enough that projects and ideas can really be accomplished.
@bree If you don't really care for me or if you don't like Asher that's fine but considering that a regrouping of government (or what ever you want to call it) in the forum has to happen, it would be nice if you simply replied with your ideas for the new structure. Please try to be as objective as possible in this discussion. We're all trying to help in what ways we can.
|
|
Cortney
Star
[AWD:0c15]The Objectioner
The Bown
Posts: 885
|
Post by Cortney on Jul 15, 2010 12:49:52 GMT -5
I'm not a narrow-minded person, but I cannot stand the idea of completely ruining the forum with politics and strict government. All of those ideas are too strict. I'm all for the admins plus some natural leaders, and I'm not choosing one of those three systems - I disagree with all of them. No amount of change could fix that. I'll gladly keep my eye on the new forum government ideas thread, but I don't agree with any of these.
|
|
|
Post by Rogers91 on Jul 15, 2010 12:50:38 GMT -5
ohh my lord this is alot of words.. im now at the systemes god i am tired of reading.. ohh well now to get on it...
|
|
|
Post by mashuga31 on Jul 15, 2010 12:51:25 GMT -5
personally i'm leaning toward system 1...i mean its simple...find a person to replace dan, someone the tribe trusts, someone with vision, and someone who can pick up where dan left off...everything else would stay the same...and the tribe would choose it's leader. you'll notice i made it rather difficult but not impossible to remove this leader, so if things got bad, the leader could be removed. someone like me lol edit: jk maybe...
|
|
|
Post by bombmaniac on Jul 15, 2010 12:53:58 GMT -5
OH! a side note here...its not limited to these 3 systems! i'll repeat, IT IS NOT LIMITED TO THESE 3 SYSTEMS!!! if anyone wants to come up with a new idea, and present all it's guidelines like has been done with these 3 systems, that system will be added to this thread in the first post, and to the poll in 2 weeks. SO START THINKING!!!
|
|
|
Post by mashuga31 on Jul 15, 2010 13:04:10 GMT -5
I've got a system I think everyone can agree on.
We change nothing.
However, we make the few "Natural Leaders" discussed as moderators just so new members can see their status. Mind you not Admins, just moderators.
I think we should also add a "SPOTM Debate" subforum in the debates section so people may discuss these sorts of things without the need for polls and votes. I mean you can mainly see the reaction here is bad, and that's what the majority is. You can tell just by reading a thread what should happen, why is there a need to vote.
I also want to bring up that my triads and councils deal isn't a form of government. It's just a way of keeping track of things and actually get stuff done. If we want to start we're going to.
Asher, you have the right idea, but you're projecting it to the wrong audience. I have to admit, the only system I half agree with is the first one, however all of the voting and the 14 days and the minimum of 80 votes? It all seems very democratic wheras this is supposed to be a tribal form of government.
|
|
|
Post by bombmaniac on Jul 15, 2010 13:07:08 GMT -5
yeah imma add that in in the poll in 2 weeks there will be an option: "CHANGE NOTHING" this thread is a work in progress, it was made in 8 hours last night by 4 people, obviously there is plenty to iron out.
|
|