Subject:
|
Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 20 Feb 2000 16:17:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1219 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Frank Filz writes:
> > This sounds reasonable to me, perhaps using vote as last resort if
> > concensus fails, all parties having voiced their opinions?
>
> Well the idea of consensus is that you try and reach an agreement that
> everyone can feel comfortable with (even if they don't all agree with it).
> Allowing a vote to shortcut consensus means your not using consensus. The
> idea of consensus is to make sure that every opinion is listened to and
> given consideration.
I agree with the concept of concensus, but there isn't always a "right" way to
go about something - there will be times when someone will never feel
comfortable with a certain compromise. Rather than have a panel continually
reiterate their (possibly equally valid) opinions, because concensus is needed
before progress can be made.. would it not be more helpful to note differences
of opinion and move to a vote - perhaps giving consensus a time-limit?
> The advantage I see to consensus over voting for this
> is that the panel is able to present a unified decision.
True - if/when voting would be used, one of the preconditions of it would have
to be that everyone would agree with the outcome.
> Immediate action might include:
>
> - posting or e-mailing a warning
> - blocking access to newsgroups
> - just acknowledging that the panel is aware of the issue (which would
> hopefully curtail some of the bickering)
Agreed, although will panel-members have the power to block access to
newsgroups?
> The reason I think private discussion has merit is that it allows the panel
> to discuss information which perhaps should not be public. I would also note
> that at least in the US, jury and higher court deliberations are private.
:) Agreed that the facility for private discussion should be accomadated,
although I have questions about how and when it would be used.
I would guess that jury deliberations are private to protect the individual
members, or because of the seriousness of certain crimes. Neither of these are
applicable to a panel that discusses posting infractions on a LEGO newsgroup!
> Again, dirty laundry may be aired which shouldn't be made public.
What sort of dirty laundry? It is probably just my lack of experience - but I
can't think of a situation that requires underwear to be secretly cleansed.
That isn't to say that there won't be such occurances, just will there be
enough to warrant private deliberations in anything but a minority of cases?
I'm moving towards the idea that maybe even reaching concensus or voting should
be public..
For example - if a panel member argues for a higher punishment for person XYZ,
and later on person XYZ has a grudge against the panel member because of this..
then too bad. IMHO a panel member should serve the community, and accept the
responsibility, and ramifications that that brings - the ideal panel member
would be someone who speaks their mind, whether or not it is a popular
viewpoint or not (eg Todd, Mike, Larry). (IMHO)
This does require a mature community though.
BTW, how many (if there is a limit) panel members are we thinking of? While a
small number (5) would be easily manageable, higher numbers like 7 or 9 might
account for some people being offline occasionally.. and might give a broader
spectrum of opinions.
Richard
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
| (...) On the other hand... I personally think the panel should present a united front. This is why I think that the idea of appeals is not such a good one. Once something is being talked about by "the panel", it's pretty clear the T&C have been (...) (25 years ago, 20-Feb-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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)
|
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
|
|
|
|
