| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Orion Pobursky wrote:
> > The amount of spotlights that Kevin's post has generated
> > should tell you something about the frustrations of the general membership
> > regarding the fact that this process is not transparent nor will the new
> > rules have an open public discussion period before being instituted.
>
> Not every process should be transparent - or else the Admins would do all of
> their discussion in .admin.general and not on a private LT list. We do it
> that way because we have high expectations for Admins - and also, we feel
> that private discussion is better discussion than 100% public discussion.
>
> If the committee were transparent.. then what is the purpose of the
> committee? Why not just release the documents to all of Lugnet and the world
> and ask for input? I'd think it would weaken those documents.
Ok, I'm going to say again what I've been saying privately-- I wholeheartedly
disagree.
People want to see what's going on. That's how communities work. My current view
on the LTT is that they're trying to turn Lugnet into a cold-exteriored business
rather than a warm, inviting community. It's a valid option, but I don't like
it.
The common theory going around at the moment is that Lugnet is falling apart
because of the growth of the AFOL community. That there's too many people all
crammed into a small-town site, and that we've outgrown that small society feel.
I think that's mostly true, but there's one major factor as far as Lugnet is
concerned that's being left out. And that's Todd.
Who here remembers Lugnet in 1998 ~ 2000? Remember how involved Todd was at the
time? Rember how Todd acted as an admin? You wanted to know how the search
engine worked? He'd tell you. Why the skip-filter did certain things? He'd let
you know. If he had an idea, he'd run it by the community, for anyone
interested, and always listen to input with an open attitude.
In the same way, by denying public information until it's live, you're
circumventing public input and awareness. People are often more wary of things
when they haven't been a part of their creation, and are more *satisfied* when
they *have* been. By seeing something grow step-by-step, you feel a greater
attachment to it. And conversely when something jumps out at you the initial
reaction is often to be wary.
Take the current situation. How long ago did Kevin post about his resignation?
How long ago did Lenny post his? And how long has it been since we've been
calmed or reassured about the situation by the admins? Oh, I'm sure they're
talking about it behind closed doors, but how does it make your average user
feel not to know one way or another?
Part of building a community is keeping involved those who *want* to be
involved. You don't have to do what everybody says, and you can't guarantee they
won't be angry, but they'll be *less* angry if you go through the process *with*
them.
And perhaps even more important, you'll get feedback from more people. Both the
people you want, and the people who you wouldn't even think to ask. I think it
would *strengthen* the P&P document, not weaken it. Sure, you might want a
preliminary group to look it over before you opened it up to public scrutiny,
but still, give the public a chance to help you through it before it snaps into
effect.
It's the sort of thing I remember Todd doing quite a bit. Post rankings? Even
Moulton's advocation of public swearing. Todd asked the community for feedback
before, after, and even during various events.
But being open isn't all that Todd brought. In addition, he was also rarely
defensive about anything. Both Lenny and Larry? You guys can get very defensive
at times. You're human. It's perfectly understandable. But Todd gave in to
defensiveness a lot less often. And from my experiences, the same can be said of
both Kelly and Frank. I've seen many instances where they brought a welcome calm
to a heated situation rather than an authoritative stomp. I think both Lenny and
Larry are well-intentioned, intelligent, active, and responsible. All fantastic
qualities for administrators. But the one thing that's missing is being good at
public relations. If I had may way, the two of you would remain admins, but
refrain from various authoritative community relations. Your tempers too often
get the better of you, and your well-intentioned meaning can get interpreted
poorly, leading to public hellfire.
The incident concerning Kevin is a perfect example. Certain things were said
that I think ought not to have been said. At least not by administrators to
their adminees. Personally, I didn't take offense at what was said, although I
would have either said it differently or not at all. Kevin on the other hand,
took offense. I think he overreacted a bit, and took the situation to a greater
level than it perhaps deserved, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.
In a community you're always going to have people who are more emotional when it
comes to how things are phrased and what exactly is said. So it's best to have
your liasons as calm, open and upbeat as possible. The exact same reasons that
Jake was hired as a community liason for Lego. Here's a guy who takes ridiculous
heat for Lego's missteps from the most fanatic fans around. And through it all
he still manages to keep a positive attitude. And Todd brought that to Lugnet.
Last but not least, Todd brought technical innovation that's since been lacking.
If people had a problem, Todd would fix it. And it's something that's long
overdue since his presence dwindled. The internet has grown. And there's
technical solutions to many problems in the community. But the underlying code
for Lugnet hasn't kept with the times. Given that it was written mostly in
97-98, it's absolutely amazing how well it's stood the test of time, and I think
it's a testament to both Todd & Suz's excellent design work. But there's always
room for improvement and innovation.
For those that don't know, I hope Dan Boger will be aiding with that greatly.
Long ago, Dan helped in a limited sense with Lugnet code, and now is helping
once more. And with a more active administration, his efforts I hope can be put
to good use.
But let me be clear. I don't want Larry or Lenny off the admin team. I have less
experience with Lenny, so I can't speak as much on his behalf, but I think you
bring one thing to the table that Todd wasn't able to, and that's drive and
followthrough. Larry, your devotion to certain initiatives is well known. You
continue to push issues and help make sure they're not lost by the wayside. Your
devotion and committment to the hobby and to Lugnet have proven that you've
earned your spot on the administration. And that's where Todd was lacking, even
way back in Lugnet's early years.
All in all, I think the Lugnet administration may indeed be headed to where it
really ought to be. I think the talents of all everyone involved fill all the
holes that need filling. If all of those in the admin team work to their
strengths, I think Lugnet has a great future.
DaveE
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Legends of Todd
|
| In lugnet.admin.general, David Eaton wrote: <snip> (...) I completely concur with everything DaveE just stated (as if that's worth anything...) Dave K (19 years ago, 21-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: Legends of Todd
|
| (...) An excellent post, Dave. A few things I want to touch on - the Admins' basic idea of how the P&P process would work is essentially what you described here. We write it, work on it. Share it with a few people and get their input, get the (...) (19 years ago, 21-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
| (...) No. I was very upset by Kevin's post - specifically how he characterized me (aka Jacko-dmin), and the other admins. I went through five different drafts. I don't think this was the best responce possible, but I wanted to do something - rather (...) (19 years ago, 21-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
90 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
