Subject:
|
Re: Self Organisation (Was: Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 22 Feb 2000 03:19:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2075 times
|
| |
|
|
James Brown <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote in article
<FqB9J7.Hos@lugnet.com>...
> > > > > 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?
> > 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.
> > > 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.
I caught your point entirely. I've cut our conversation from above and
will paste it below, I agree with you on this point:
> >
> > > 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.
You are right in that having any sort of open election allows for the
possibility that Todd & Suzanne may wind up having someone on this council
that they're not happy with. I agree with you. There are people who might
want it, but shouldn't have it, and there are people who would be perfect
for it who won't want to be doing it. Mine is not a perfect solution, I'm
just making sure it gets offered before this is all written in stone.
> > > 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.
I am not concerned about this. You're right, as always, Todd has the final
say and could easily rectify one bad apple. I'm much more concerned with a
situation occuring in which the entire council does not agree with Todd, or
vice versa. Perhaps an unrealistic thought on my part. Again, I'm not
saying that this council thing is the worst idea since shag rug, I'm just
saying it's moving at the speed of light right now and I'm afraid mistakes
may be made unknowingly.
> 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 not sure, I don't know the exact reason that Todd's open to this idea.
That's another reason I'm harping on it, to try and make sure everyone
(including me, who's a bit dense sometimes) knows why it's happening.
> 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, I really wish I knew why it bothered me so much. It's a feeling
that completely overwhelmed me last night when I saw the .council group had
been created and people were already worrying about who was going to be the
chairperson. I resisted posting last night because it bothered me so much.
The irony here is that I consider myself a poster who very often stays
on-topic and posts to the correct group. I don't envision a situation in
which I cross this council the wrong way. Still, it just seems weird
somehow. I feel a bit like I've been tricked into thinking that LUGNET was
this nice cozy little place that was taken care of by fierce but lovable
innkeepers, only to find out that it's now so big and bad that we now need
'posting supervisors'. Am I loopy? Am I like Johnny Fever in WKRP
worrying about the 'phone cops'? Am I really the ONLY one who feels this
way? Or just the only one speaking up?
Sorry, but this has struck quite a dischord with me. I do not normally
worry about the behind-the-scenes goings on of LUGNET, but I just want my
position clear on this. I don't think rushing ahead with the council, in
the way in which it seems to be progressing, is a good idea at this time.
I think it has come about as a knee-jerk reaction to some ill-conceived
posts of late. I worry that there will be some regret that will follow.
I hope I'm wrong.
Regards,
Allan
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
