Subject:
|
Re: Self Organisation (Was: Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 20 Feb 2000 19:29:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1244 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Richard Franks writes:
>
> > I get the feeling that:
> > a) Todd expects some form of LUGNET community regulation.
> > b) Todd is *waiting* for us to self-organise, in the spirit that such an
> > endeavour should happen as spontaneously as possible.
>
> There's a problem with this. The theoretical panel has to inherit "power"
> from Todd. Right now, Todd is the only admin. Not only that, but he's the
> owner. I'm sure we've all seen posts that read, "Well, I might not agree, but
> it's Todd's sandbox." Todd has all the perceived "power" [1]. Todd would
> have to make it clear that this was an extension of his authority.
Yep, point (b) was an extension of point (a).. see below.
> > c) We are all a little too shy to start the ball rolling, in fear of stepping
> > on each others toes. Also we perhaps expect Todd to organise it for us, like
> > everything before.
>
> See above. It's the same kind of thing. It's difficult to even conceive of
> suggesting taking some of Todd's authority until he says he's willing to do
> it. Even then, it's up to him what form it will take, because it's his call.
> We can make suggestions until we're blue in the face, but the form it will
> take is ultimately up to him (even if his decision is "the most popular
> suggestion").
Yep, I didn't mean to sound in any way disrespectful, as in assuming authority
from Todd. What I meant is that I don't think that Todd is going to say "This
is what is going to happen, and this is how it will be implemented". Rather,
the initiative has to come from us on this one - it's a community issue, and as
such the community has to take it upon itself to initiate and participate.
> > d) Todd will implement whatever we decide, even if we make a bad decision.
>
> That I seriously doubt. A bad decision, implemented by Todd, could cause
> Lugnet to perish. And I don't think Todd's about to let that happen.
It was meant as more of a compliment of Todds admin style really. Eg private vc
public deliberation - I believe that Todd would let panel members deliberate in
private, if that is what the overall opinion was for.. despite the fact that he
has concerns about it. Mostly I was referring to small bad decisions though -
hopefully he will offer his advice, but if it wasn't taken up into the final
implementation plans then I don't think he would enforce it.
> > I'll start off by suggesting some groups - the concept is more relevant than
> > the group-names..
>
> I think we should decide what form the "panel" is going to take, *then* decide
> what new group/s are needed.
Yep, agreed - that's where the discussion is now I think.
Richard
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
