Subject:
|
Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 21 Apr 2005 23:10:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2060 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, David Koudys wrote:
| |
THe good news is with greater transparency comes smaller fallouts. Again,
the “taxation without representation” lead to a huge ruckus, if I recall.
Now that you have the representation, the fallout of governmental
transgressions, thus far, hasn’t lead to the same type of ‘ruckus’.
|
I don’t know about all of this. People keep talking about transparency and how
great it all is, but exactly what do you want to see? Do you want the Admin
emails to be public? Do you want to see every draft of public pronouncements?
To use the term paper metaphor someone else used - you show your professor the
final copy. You let a friend do the editting for feedback. What the Admins
were doing here (in regards to the LPRV committee) was showing it to some
‘friends’ who could give us feedback. I think we were expecting a one/two week
turn around.
So if the Admins failed at being transparent... what is the information you
wanted to know but didn’t? A P&P document that we didn’t feel was ready? Is
that what you wanted to see?
| |
To be clear, I’m not advocating that every single member of LUGNET has to
sign off on every single change at this website. I’m advocating transparency
of the procedures and the changes--“We, the administration team, think that
this is a nifty thing to do and are thinking about implementing said
feature.” or “we, the administration team, in order to clarify the rules
regarding this issue, wish to modify the ToS to include the following--blah
blah blah”
|
Problem is, any pronouncement that starts with “We, the admins..” needs the
feedback of all the admins, and that takes a week or so to get together.
Or are you saying that the Admins need to present documents to the public before
they are implemented? Since the Admins reserve the right to change policies,
etc - then why wait a while before implementing something? If there is a great
rationale for changing a policy, even one that is already in place, then what
keeps the Admins from changing it?
| |
Information. If people care, they’ll read it and voice their
support/concerns. If people don’t care, then no harm/no foul.
|
People don’t care until something affects them. When it does, then theres lots
of harm and foul.
| |
The admin team should think of itself as an equal part of the
community that basically has the added responsibility of ‘rebooting the
server’ when necessary. We don’t need guidance counsellors to ‘guide
LUGNET’s path’, we don’t need CEO’s to usher in ‘a bold new future’, and we
most certainly don’t need an aristocracy (or oligarchy, take your pick) made
up of ‘the elite’ who feel like they know what’s best for the masses.
|
You mentioned a “community with many voices” - what Lugnet ‘doesn’t need’ that
you mention above - many people have contacted the Admins saying that Lugnet
| |
does< need all of that. Lugnet needs vision. Lugnet needs direction, to keep
|
flame wars quiet and make the flagship of the LEGO community looking something
closer to pristine. Lugnets need this and that.
The people who want a leader are asking for one just as much as the people who
don’t want a leader. Who should the Admins listen to?
| |
In the big issues over the past few months, the perception, at least from
these cheap seats, is sometimes just that--“Shut up and wait until we tell
you what’s going to happen--oh, and there’ll be no more debate on it when it
does happen.”.
|
It’s funny how different the perception is to me. Because altho you say the
perception is “there’ll be no more debate”, there is still lots of debate. The
admins, who are supposedly telling people to shut up, are gloriously unable to
make anyone shut up. So where exactly is that perception coming from?
-Lenny
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
| (...) LUGNET historians might remember the flurry of posts about CP and cp--community policing. It was all in the open and we all chimed in and we all hashed it out (at least those of us who felt strongly about it) (...) Again, perception, even if (...) (19 years ago, 21-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
90 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
