Subject:
|
Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 20 Feb 2000 12:56:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1141 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Frank Filz writes:
>
> Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <38AF34B1.B4C22D8F@voyager.net>...
>
> > Use something like onelist. The mails are available forever. (note, I
> > said something LIKE onelist... actually Todd has the technology to do
> > this, I think, without going outside his own sandbox)
>
> I agree mailing list is the best way.
I don't have a strong opinion either way, as it will only directly effect panel
members anyway - but is the move towards a mailing list a desire for privacy? I
always thought that newsgroups gave better structure and reference abilities,
so if there was such a thing as a 'private' newsgroup that could be used when
needed- would that be just as good, or am I missing an inherent benefit of
mailing lists?
> Perhaps we should start tossing more concrete ideas of how decisions will be
> made, what kinds of things deserve action, and what kinds of penalties
> should be invoked.
Do you mean like defining the scope of responsibility and limitation of powers?
> For decision making, I suggest consensus rather than a vote. The idea of
> consensus is that a decision is reached that all find agreeable. This means
> that if one person has a feeling that an over or under reaction is
> occurring, then the group must respond to that. Of course if the group takes
> too long to make a decision, or is unable to, Todd may step in and declare
> an action by fiat. I think Todd should at least observe the panel
> discussions, even if he isn't on the panel (perhaps he is a non-voting
> member?). Of course Todd has ultimate override authority.
This sounds reasonable to me, perhaps using vote as last resort if concensus
fails, all parties having voiced their opinions?
> I think that if a panel member sees a serious violation, they should act
> immediately, but then the whole panel needs to come to a consensus as to
> whether to continue the action, or do something different.
What do you mean by 'act immeadiately'? Do you mean, step in as an authorative
voice.. try to stop any flamage, and make a statement that the matter has been
referred to the panel?
> I don't think the panel should generally be involved in legal type issues
> (like IP law violations), unless the panel has an IP lawyer (not that Todd
> is an IP lawyer, it is his sandbox, and he does have ultimate responsibility
> for the whole thing, so he has to make decisions even if he can't make well
> educated decisions).
Yep - agreed, furthermore I'd be perfectly happy if Todd had the power of veto
over the panel. He is perfectly qualified to do the job by himself anyway :)
That may sound a bit weird - graciously granting Todd the right to do what he
wants with his own thing, but I think that it is important to be clear where
responsibility lies and merges.
> I think panel discussions should be private, but there may be some things
> which need to be aired in public, I would assume lugnet.admin.general is the
> place to do so, but there might be cause for a separate group.
My take on it, is that being on the panel is a position of responsibility.. not
an oportunity to become more popular. Someone on the panel should be prepared
to act fairly, and be seen to act fairly towards everyone. If a panel member is
known for fairness then should they feel ashamed for voicing what they truely
feel?
Having a public panel means that people can see exactly what is wrong, and why.
People won't be able to say, oh - so'n'so is before the panel, and is good
friends with half of them - they'll go easy.
That said - there will be times when privacy is necessary, although I'd imagine
rarely. If the transgression is so major that it requires privacy, then maybe
it is out of the scope of the panels responsibility anyway?
Richard
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
| Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) panel (...) privacy? I (...) abilities, (...) when (...) be (...) powers? (...) means (...) takes (...) concensus (...) Well the idea of consensus is that you try and reach an agreement that everyone can (...) (25 years ago, 20-Feb-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
| Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <38AF34B1.B4C22D8F@v...er.net>... (...) if (...) might (...) some (...) I agree mailing list is the best way. Perhaps we should start tossing more concrete ideas of how decisions will be made, what kinds of things (...) (25 years ago, 20-Feb-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
82 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
|
|
|
|
