Subject:
|
Re: Bloviate
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 3 Apr 2006 22:57:16 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5997 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, David Koudys wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Kelly McKiernan wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > This assumes a couple of things that may not be relevant on LUGNET at this
> > time: one, that members acquiesce to admin authority; and two, that there is
> > proactive admin presence and activity.
> >
> > {Kelly}
>
> There are a few more things that warnings, proper adminship and the like are
> contingent on--
>
> That the admins are not a bunch of bloviating blowhards (that leaves me out of
> the admin running right there) who appear to me more interested in the letter of
> the laws than the spirit of the laws
>
> That the admins are not playing 'selective banning' with people they don't
> appreciate vs. the people they do
>
> That the admins are not a bunch of uptight 'constitutionalists' who debate every
> little point ad nauseum and want to set up committees and peer groups and yap
> about how they want to do the right thing when, in fact, all they are doing is
> souring the atmosphere.
I agree, admins that can't be trusted or don't behave for the good of their
community are problematic. I belong to at least one message board (not
LEGO-related) where a good deal of the above applies. I don't post there often.
But if you're referring to the former LUGNET transition team and admin group (of
which I was a part), I wouldn't characterize the people I worked with that way
at all.
- snip -
> And maybe it would be better if there were a more demonstrative admin team.
> However, there isn't. Contrary to my friend Lar's assertion, letting the
> (previous) admins/owners of LUGNET know that their efforts in the past were and
> are appreciated can only do good for the entire community. I was actively
> involved in volunteer organizations for a long time--getting pleasant feedback
> makes the volunteering all the better. Getting negative feedback makes one tend
> towards just 'packing it in'--there's nothing quite like getting kicked when
> you're down to stop you from getting back up.
This is true. I've felt that way at BZPower many times - working for hours on a
news story or forum upgrade or something, only to have the work massively
criticized and the effort disregarded. It's trying.
On the other hand, sometimes it takes massive feedback to get across what the
community finds important. More than once I've been forced to reevaluate my
assumptions because of overwhelming (even highly negative) feedback about
something. Sometimes it results in change, hopefully for the better.
I find myself in very close understanding for where Todd and Suz are... I've
been there (and am there to a certain extent now), and it's a tough spot. It's a
balance between what's best for oneself, and for the people who make up the
community you've helped form. I've been so frustrated with BZP that I've
seriously contemplating just pulling the plug - but the impact that would have
on thousands of kids would be unacceptable to me, so other solutions are needed.
Fortunately, I've been able to weather the ups and downs, through the help of
the community itself and co-owners/admins there. The structure of LUGNET makes
that more difficult for T&S to incrementally offload - it's more of an
all-or-nothing here, it seems.
It's finding the balance that's important. I feel for Suz, as I know the kind of
pain being responsible for something like this can cause, especially when you
don't have the time or ambition to do it justice. It's all the more painful,
since it's been going on for a year, and most everyone here feels the same
uncertainty about the future. I also hope that whatever she chooses to do - new
ownership, new admins, shutting the site, or whatever she decides as the best
solution - happens relatively soon, to help her move on and help the community
members as well.
- Kelly
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Bloviate (was Re: Warnings( was: WAKE UP!))
|
| In lugnet.admin.general, Kelly McKiernan wrote: <snip> (...) There are a few more things that warnings, proper adminship and the like are contingent on-- That the admins are not a bunch of bloviating blowhards (that leaves me out of the admin (...) (19 years ago, 3-Apr-06, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
