Subject:
|
Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 23 Apr 2005 13:24:24 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
2864 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> And elsewhere, that's been my management experience (in real life) as well.
so why not here???
>
> (snipped the rest, all valid experiential narrative)
>
> We think there are technical changes coming (they're already implemented, just
> awaiting putting the P&P in place) that will greatly reduce one source of
> perceived heavy handedness, the cancel request. (personally I hate the cancel
> request as a way to adhere to the no censorship model but am not ready to give
> up on no censorship as an ideal, and there's currently no other way)
can this be discussed now and here? please.
> That said there's sometimes a difference between perception and reality and
> sometimes a difference between the perceptions of situations or events by
> different people.
>
> First...
>
> What exactly is heavy handed? Given the toolset we have now, what other
> approaches could be used?
YOU guys are/were heavy handed. IMO.
The other approach is the one that tony so eloquently described. LESS
is more.
That's a serious question. It's easy to say that the
> admins are heavy handed but is that actually because there's a lot of visibility
> to the admin actions? Isn't it true that other places are actually much MORE
> heavy handed but don't have that perception, because reviewing actions and
> administrative actions all happen behind the scenes?
LUGNET is NOT those other places!!!! STOP treating it like it is!!!!!!!
YES we are spoiled.
YES it was different in the old days.
YES Todd is gone.
when Todd passed you the torch, why did the administration feel a need
to "take lugnet in another direction?" how about leaving the status quo????
people have made charts, and show that the post count is down, other
lugs (and people) rise, and LEAVE lugnet. All around the same time as
the LTT??? coincidence? I say NO!
>
> Next...
>
> What are the desired rules for LUGNET? Should it be all things to all people?
> We've believed not. Kelly has articulated in previous posts our refinement of
> Todd's original vision, that it be family friendly, that it be welcoming. But
> that means it's not necessarily for everyone. If LUGNET should have rules and
> they should be family friendly ones, there needs to be SOME enforcement
> mechanism, doesn't there?
>
> When Todd wasn't active (and Suz had to try to step in) and there weren't any
> admins LUGNET went through a period of laxity. The community wasn't capable of
> maintaining order by itself, in my view. Arguably we still haven't recovered
> from that time.
recovered from WHAT? i dont seem to recall chaos death and
destruction. the sun still came up, and the earth still spins. so
what are you saving us from? (mildly sarcastic, but a serious question)
> Finally...
>
> Others in various threads have said that increased enforcement is required
> because of growth, and then have been rebutted by statistics that show that
> growth isn't actually there. I would ask, can that argument be turned on its
> head? Is it possible that the anarchy period and the resistance to reviewing,
> and the amount of discussion about specific actions, are poisoning the
> atmosphere and driving people away, and causing shrinkage?
>
> I don't know the answers...
I do. I say YES. I say that the actions of the administration in the
past is DIRECTLY responsible for the fleeing of the mass's.
Chris
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
| (...) Different than an online community, I'm sure you would agree, but clearly a source of a lot of useful insight, thanks for sharing it. (...) And elsewhere, that's been my management experience (in real life) as well. (snipped the rest, all (...) (20 years ago, 23-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
|
|
|
|
