Subject:
|
Re: Self Organisation (Was: Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 22 Feb 2000 02:57:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2041 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> James Brown <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote...
> > In lugnet.admin.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> > > > In lugnet.admin.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> > > > > What about a good old-fashioned vote by the 200+ paid members of
> > > > > LUGNET. Might this not be a good time to excercise some democracy?
>
> > > Again, I guess I didn't present this idea clearly. I was just suggesting
> > > that the council members themselves be selected by a vote, rather than be
> > > appointed. I agree, trying to involve everyone in every issue would
> > > become impossible immediately. However I propose that simply appointing
> > > people to such a position may be equally unpalatable to some. Why not use
> > > this opportunity to let the membership express itself?
> >
> > On a hunch: It's because, especially in a small community (which Lugnet
> > still is), democracy doesn't necessarily bring the best people to the table.
> > I've worked with a number of small special interest groups(1), and it's very
> > easy for an elected position to turn into a popularity contest. Not
> > blatantly, necessarily, but it often happens that the best known person will
> > get the job, regardless of who's best qualified.
>
> Well, using that logic, if the best person can be appointed, why can't they
> also be nominated and elected? You're still dealing with the same group of
> people. And, as you mention, this is a relatively small community... the
> folks best suited to this task are not unknown to the rest of the group.
Well, they can. But why? More on this below...
> The other thing is that from what I've seen democracy always works, even in
> the smallest of groups. So long as you've got at least 3 people who want
> to vote on something, democracy works. It isn't always pretty, and the
> person(s) who get out voted may not like the answer, but it works very
> well. It's too bad you've had some negative experiences, I can say I've
> had many positive ones.
>
> > Bluntly, an election would accomplish one of two things:
> > 1:It would give the same result as appointments: people that Todd &
> > Suzanne are comfortable working with, or
>
> You're right, the possibility of this happening is there, no one can
> guarantee it won't.
>
> > 2:It would put forward people they aren't comfortable working with, which
> > would make the council at best ineffective, and more likely a drag on their
> > time and resources.
>
> No one gets elected who doesn't want to. No one has to accept a nomination
> if they don't want it. I can't see that someone who didn't want to do the
> job would ever wind up doing it.
Hmm. I think you missed the gist of my point. People who want to do it are
not necessarily the same people that Todd & Suzanne want doing, or are
comfortable working with.
> > We trust Todd & Suzanne with a great deal... I see no problem with trusting
> > them with this, too.
>
> I trust them immensely. I wouldn't spend so much time reading LUGNET if I
> didn't have faith in Todd's ability to keep things level. However, a
> council who sometimes acts on his behalf??? I can't be so sure about that.
> I don't have good feelings about it. I guess this whole thing has caught
> me off guard. I didn't ever expect to see LUGNET turning in such a
> direction. Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, I'm not sure. But I
> figured I had better speak up now, or else be accused of sitting on the
> sidelines and not trying to participate. I get the feeling that with or
> without a vote, this will all come to pass, as it seems to be moving rather
> quickly already.
I'm not entirely sure what is concering you here, to be honest. If Todd asks
people to be on a council, he can just as easily unask them if they turn out to
abuse the authority he's sent their way.
Maybe we're just not seeing the same thing here. What I'm seeing is that Todd
is asking some people to help him out with keeping things on an even keel,
because it's getting too large for him to keep track of everything himself.(1)
I'm getting the impression that you've got a much different impression of
what's going on...Could you be more specific in your concerns? I certainly
don't want (and I don't think Todd wants) to leave people with the impression
that things are turning into some sort of police state!
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
1: Let me know if I'm out to lunch, eh Todd?
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
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
|
|
|
|
