|
Post by Firefox on Nov 26, 2012 13:00:43 GMT
Here's a thought I had about how the forum can work as it gets bigger. Also prompted by what some of the original founders wanted to see.
Basically anyone who takes on a County in the wild camping location lists becomes part of the the "mod group." Don't worry though it is not loads of work you only have to mod the one County forum (plus any other forums you want to take on that are unmodded at the moment). As part of the mod group you get access to the mod forum where there will be a vote on key board issues. For example, if there is a disruptive member, and whether they should take a break from the board etc. Rather than have one or a few admins decide, or it comes to a question of the admin "taking sides" or making autocratic decisions there would be 20-30 mods who get equal votes on a subject which would give more balance on something. Also if appropriate, decisions can be put to a public vote so that all board members will get a vote on an issue.
Let us know your thoughts on if this is a good idea or not.
|
|
|
Post by kangooroo on Nov 26, 2012 13:50:52 GMT
Democracy and joint decision making is good - and contrasts sharply with another forum. The risk is if the forum expands too broadly and there are so many moderators (I think 20-30 are probably too many) that decisions are never made or the moderators need moderating - although I don't think the latter is a likely scenario here!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 16:58:29 GMT
I agree with Kangooroo. 20 - 30 is a rather large number of mods to vote on forum related matters.
Perhaps 7 would be enough. These people to be elected by the membership via a poll.
Just sayin'
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Nov 26, 2012 17:19:58 GMT
I guess we could have fewer than 20-30. But we're going to have at least that number doing counties though and already have 5 admins. Maybe 5 admins and 15 mods for 20 and then if 12 (60%) vote that's enough for a "quorum". Or 5 admins and 10 mods and 8 out of those vote then that's enough. It depends on how often people log in, but could leave votes open for a week.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 17:32:49 GMT
Me 'eads spinnin' now. Simple is best IMO and I should know!
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Nov 27, 2012 3:48:38 GMT
Me 'eads spinnin' now. Simple is best IMO and I should know! LOL, I know! Some confusion goes with the territory though...Things always get a little more complicated when democracy is involved. We'll sort something out though!!
|
|
|
Post by whitevanwoman on Nov 29, 2012 11:21:27 GMT
Firefox, as ever I'll leave the maths to you. You know my thoughts re transparency and democracy :-)
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Nov 29, 2012 15:36:01 GMT
No probs. Looks like initially we may have enough active people for about 5 mods and 5 admins.
Then it will be 10 people and say 6 of those voting is enough to decide.
Polls would be open for a week.
If necessary the vote could go to the public (all board members) if considered appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by millie on Nov 29, 2012 17:08:05 GMT
Has anyone ever used Survey Monkey www.surveymonkey.com/Not sure if it's any use for this forum but might be worth looking into.
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Nov 29, 2012 18:03:14 GMT
Has anyone ever used Survey Monkey www.surveymonkey.com/Not sure if it's any use for this forum but might be worth looking into. Good link - It could be useful If we have any more complicated decisions I guess we can email people. However most things could be covered by the on site polls... if people vote in them! Most people want democracy but getting them to vote is another matter Still .... I guess a kind of trend is emerging even though the poll has not been up long.
|
|
|
Post by vwT5surfbus on Nov 29, 2012 18:33:13 GMT
30 mods too many ? but comittee (sp?) of 10-12 about rite
|
|
|
Post by TammiJ on Jan 26, 2013 22:25:42 GMT
It's the right idea. 30 mods is too many. They'll fight more than the members!!! Have 10-12 like Mr SurfyBus says
|
|
|
Post by therebelcamper on Feb 12, 2013 20:18:45 GMT
I have just browsed through this... and need to pass on an experience or two
I do not have any MODS as there is no need
My experience with MODS is they take it upon themselves to admin... usually by pm - ing a member without the admins knowledge, with threats of barring for the most silly reasons, but usually its because the member becomes a threat to the mod.. in respect of organising things for a forum, that the mod would not have thought of. ( Jealousy )
I have been through this with another forum, The admin was directed to bar me, on the grounds that I was organising an event, without permission of the boards moderator.
After putting my case forward by direct email.. I was reinstated, but to be barred by the second admin.. after 7 days... There was a rally that I had booked to attend in Norfolk.. where both admins were HOSTING.
I arrived on the Friday evening, pitched up... members were arriving..... as time passed no hosts were in attendance... I was asked to host the rally... on Sat evening two guys came up to me and introduced themselves to me... as Ratty & Ian... The Admins.
The evening was going fine however... most of the members decided to blank the situation and go to the pub. I was now alone with these guys... who thanked me for taking over and hostimg the rally... and confirme that my membership would be reinstated at once...
It was... but after four days.. again barred.
because the mod insisted.
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Feb 12, 2013 20:57:02 GMT
Yes, I have had these squabbles in forums before too. The mods have kind of limited powers here but they do have equal voting rights on the committee. The flip side is if you just have one admin then they can become autocratic and start making bad decisions so having a few people makes it better in that respect as you have a check on what the admin(s) is(are) doing. We have it much more relaxed here in that you can mention/link other forums, you can advertise other events, or joint events with other places; basically free speech within the Proboards TOS of course, and we don't allow bullying or harassment of members but that's about it. So all the politics of different forums and threats of barring for spurious reasons won't really be applicable. For example people can PM other people about another forum if they want whereas many admins would ban you for that - it's all down to jealousy and controlling their own members but we think people should be able to pick and chose where they want to go, so we're relaxed about linking and sharing so long as it isn't spam. The mods are more forum leaders - posting new topics and helping out etc and helping to vote in overall forum policy than doing actual moderation in the form of warnings, infractions, or bannings. We just don't have a need for that kind of stuff. People want to come here to relax, not for it to be like the office or school where they are told to do this or that. I need to get the constitution amended and put up - you can have a look at that and see what you think
|
|
|
Post by Pollik on Feb 13, 2013 10:58:23 GMT
The first forum I founded was as transparent as I could make it. Admin and mods had their conversations in public view. The worst drawback of that was that, inevitably, the wider membership wanted to join in. I say it was a drawback, but in many ways it wasn't.
In the final analysis, it boils down to having the right kind of people in place, whatever other arrangements are in place. People who seek power are pretty much self barring as far as I am concerned. I like to see people who see themselves as facilitators (because someone has to be). I try to avoid using the expression "leaders", because while it can mean people who lead by showing the way, it has also come to be sometimes synonymous with controllers.
In fifteen years of being involved in "admin" of forums and groups, I have never needed to threaten anyone, kick anyone, delete posts (apart from spam), although some have flounced off after intervened in a flame war. The thing is, you never know what other people are going through (very relevant in my main area of interest) and it is not usually helpful to get heavy with them. Maybe they have an encounter with Atos coming up soon, you just don't know.
To the extent that I have a voice here, I have a strong preference for total transparency...people don't have to read the dull stuff, but they can if they want. I am also not a great one for rules. Making rules is like building a software application - there are always bugs in them and there are always people who like the challenge of finding technical ways round them. And they risk growing into an uncontrollable leviathan. I do like frameworks, though, where a principle is established but the detail (where the devil is) is not filled in.
I keep thinking of comparisons with what Occupy London did outside St Pauls - public meeting, establishing a library and university, feeding the homeless - they (and other parts of the movement around the world) showed another way of social interaction, an alternative to an elected dictatorship of professional leaders.
Sorry, I have wandered off topic, sort of.
Would some kind of system of "public meetings or discussions" work? People join in...or they don't. People vote...or they don't.
|
|
|
Post by Etienne Le Croq on Feb 13, 2013 11:17:43 GMT
Or a maxi, Princess, Metro, Marina,Sherpa................
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2013 11:34:04 GMT
The first forum I founded was as transparent as I could make it. Admin and mods had their conversations in public view. The worst drawback of that was that, inevitably, the wider membership wanted to join in. I say it was a drawback, but in many ways it wasn't. In the final analysis, it boils down to having the right kind of people in place, whatever other arrangements are in place. People who seek power are pretty much self barring as far as I am concerned. I like to see people who see themselves as facilitators (because someone has to be). I try to avoid using the expression "leaders", because while it can mean people who lead by showing the way, it has also come to be sometimes synonymous with controllers. In fifteen years of being involved in "admin" of forums and groups, I have never needed to threaten anyone, kick anyone, delete posts (apart from spam), although some have flounced off after intervened in a flame war. The thing is, you never know what other people are going through (very relevant in my main area of interest) and it is not usually helpful to get heavy with them. Maybe they have an encounter with Atos coming up soon, you just don't know. To the extent that I have a voice here, I have a strong preference for total transparency...people don't have to read the dull stuff, but they can if they want. I am also not a great one for rules. Making rules is like building a software application - there are always bugs in them and there are always people who like the challenge of finding technical ways round them. And they risk growing into an uncontrollable leviathan. I do like frameworks, though, where a principle is established but the detail (where the devil is) is not filled in. I keep thinking of comparisons with what Occupy London did outside St Pauls - public meeting, establishing a library and university, feeding the homeless - they (and other parts of the movement around the world) showed another way of social interaction, an alternative to an elected dictatorship of professional leaders. Sorry, I have wandered off topic, sort of. Would some kind of system of "public meetings or discussions" work? People join in...or they don't. People vote...or they don't. Excellent post, I'd vote for you as Prime Minister, Pollik. I'm curious about your reference to your main area of interest and the ATOS reference. Very very true. Speaking from first hand experience, am in that position at present, which is one of the main factors for considering walking away from everything and going full time. Individuals can't change systems and sometimes trying to fight systems as an individual is just too exhausting.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2013 13:45:35 GMT
Wasn’t British Leyland run by a committee? Vote in a chief admin who sets the rules and tone of the site otherwise it’ll take too long to make a decision on something and you’ll end up with an Austin Allegro Amen to that. I see no reason for a committee.
|
|
|
Post by Pollik on Feb 13, 2013 15:07:40 GMT
Thank you wvw. I never used to be political, but over the last 15 years, I have got involved in diversity, both training and counselling (LGBTQI in particular), but as my awareness grew, I have been following Occupy, Atos Miracles and other groups. Apart from Diversity, my main interest is economy and the politics of the economy (I was an assistant bank manager until 1995)...and the top level scams being pulled. I am on IB and expecting the ATOS call sometime soon...which is also one of my reasons for buggering off in the van. Like you, I feel the system has become toxic and I don't have the energy for a personal fight. It seems intentionally designed to harm people these days.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2013 15:28:46 GMT
My GP has just told me that ATOS get £6000 for every person they get off benefits - never has duty of care meant so little, and it's a very effective way of getting the benefits figures down. It's so short sighted as many vulnerable people will end up costing the tax payer far more when they are hospitalised, require additional medication, support, social care etc. My position very similar to you, feeling quite desperate, it's second time round for me and the first time did so much damage that it's taken a couple of years just to get back to where I was pre-ATOS. And now it's happening again. It galls me that ATOS will get their £6000 on my behalf but I haven't got the strength to fight a second time. Like you buggering off in the van feels like the only way out. I also got very political and was working as a volunteer with some national charities challenging welfare reform on behalf of vulnerable people but not really well enough to keep it up at the moment. I was going to PM you in case I get condemned for being a benefit scrounger but I don't really care anymore. Let them walk a mile in my shoes before judging. But they won't and they'll continue to judge. Have spent too long trying to do the right thing and challenging the system and it's worn me out, no fight left any more. People need to know what damage it's doing. I presume you know about Spartacus and Diary of a Benefit Scrounger? Also did you know there's recently been a judicial review challenging the WCA supported by Rethink, outcome due in next month or two. You're welcome to PM me if you ever wish to offload / chat, can't promise to help but can probably sympathise and won't judge. Looking forward to meeting you sometime <<hugs>>
|
|
|
Post by Pollik on Feb 13, 2013 17:03:45 GMT
I think I must have seen the Spartacus site - I remember the petition - but I will circulate it again. I knew there was a judicial review, but haven't heard in a while how it is progressing. One of the problems with Atos is that, even when you win the appeal, they start after you again within a couple of months. I wonder how many people have the strength of spirit to go through that whole thing more than once?
It is very easy not to stop, once I start talking...I don't want to derail the thread, though.
I will get to a meet sometime (I don't usually do meets), but for a couple of reasons, it will be five or six weeks before I can get on the road again.
<< HUG >>
|
|
|
Post by Firefox on Feb 13, 2013 17:15:06 GMT
We'll have to meet up sometime too Polly - I see Kangooroo a few times a year usually. Will definitely be round your way sometime. Maybe Morgan will have another welsh bash or there is a festival near Tewksbury or in Shropshire early August. Or sometimes I meet up with Kangooroo at Stonehenge as it is half way house for us
|
|