| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> 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 think that may have been a misunderstanding though - the thread was trying to
nominate someone who would recieve ideas on what the council should do, how it
should work, how it should be planned. But I agree - things are moving fast -
the creation of admin.council caught me by suprise too :)
Not that that's a bad thing of course. It gives a known place where everyone
can contribute ideas and concerns, and be heard.
> 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'.
Personally, I would envisage council members serving the community, helping
resolve issues which the community can't by itself (without the focus that the
council brings).
You might not even notice the presence of the council most of the time, as when
everything is ticking along nicely it has no purpose. But when disputes or
problems arise, there will be a group of people on hand who everyone can rely
on to deal with the issue responsibly. That isn't to say that once the issue
has been given to the council then everyone else's say is gone - admin.council
is a public group for that reason, and council members should be obligated to
listen to all concerns raised by LUGNET users, the final decision rests with
the council though. Or with Todd if he wishes!
If this stops any of the bickering or flames as in some of the more notorious
threads as of late, then surely that is a good thing?
> 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?
I doubt you are the only one, and you are probably just the first to speak up!
But no - you are not loopy :)
What is the root of your concern? The speed, or the thought of an ominious
council? Or a mixture of the two? Or something else?
> Sorry, but this has struck quite a dischord with me.
No need whatsoever to apologise for voicing your thoughts!
> 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.
The idea has been brewing for at LEAST 6 months, and so far only the groundwork
- creating the admin.council group and nominating some initial council members,
has been done. Everything else is still open - I hope you'll stick around in
the discussion and help make sure that mistakes AREN'T made!
Cheers,
Richard
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
82 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
