board77

TheEllipticalDisillusion wrote:

Quote:

All hail the committee members, and curse you scum that don't like it.

This isn't rational at all. All committees have a parallel thread in the business room for non-committee members to add their input. That's the way things are. No one is hailed.

I was responding to Jnyusas post about respecting "contributing" members and lumping "piles of shame" on whatever group I'm supposed to be a part of.

and no, VtF, I don't think it's unworkable at all. I rather thing the charter should be a reference set of principles people agree to abide by, as I said before. Such a reference would not need constant changes and updates.

So it would not be enforceable at all, ever? Then why pretend that mutual respect is a value here, if no one has any recourse if someone else chooses to violate that "principle"?

Voronwë_the_Faithful wrote:

TheMary wrote:

Jn,

Most of the committee memebers including myself have said that waiting would be best even for the simple stuff. I'm willing to cool my jets until January 2nd, if that's what everyone else wants to do.

That's not actually true, TM. Of the committee members that have expressed an opinion on the subject, there is I believe an even split. Jn, Prim, TED and myself have expressed (in varying degrees of certitude) the desire to do the simple stuff right away. You, Lidless, Elian and Fixer have expressed (again in varying degrees of certitude) the desire to wait. That's why I keep suggesting that we convene in the jury room and vote so we can let the majority of the committee decide.

My bad Voronwe you are a lovely Loremaster you know

I didn't say not enforceable. I said the rangers would act as necessary, and in order to make sure they didn't over react, there's a simple appeals process to the board.

I swear my inability to communicate ideas effectively is my only real problem. I think them, I type them, and no one understands them.

Quote:

I swear my inability to communicate ideas effectively is my only real problem. I think them, I type them, and no one understands them.

You are soooo not alone with this one hal.

Y'know, yov, I had typed up almost that exact same sentiment (about Hal needing to join in on decisons, rather than simply criticize) and then not sent it, because I continually feel like I am sort of "always available" to give Hal suggestions.



But when I read what you wrote, I just sat here nodding. I SO agree.

Hal, buddy, here I am again, giving you suggestions. Please take them with the real affection and empathy that I feel while writing this.

You need to get involved in the decision making process.

You need to take all that energy, and all those ideas, and stir them in with the mix of other's ideas and energy, and see if you can affect the way this board is runs so that you find it makes sense.

It is the ONLY way to have people really "listen" to you. I know that is what you want, but it is useless right now to simply criticize from outside the process.

That type of thing is REALLY frustrating for people who ARE trying to make a difference, by putting their hard work and time into this problem.

Just think about it, Hal. It might be a good-- and fruitful-- choice for you.

Actually, I'm not going to read this thread, nor one in the Jury Room, until Jan 2nd.

See you then.

halplm wrote:

I didn't say not enforceable. I said the rangers would act as necessary, and in order to make sure they didn't over react, there's a simple appeals process to the board.

I swear my inability to communicate ideas effectively is my only real problem. I think them, I type them, and no one understands them.

Okay, so without a charter, where do the rangers come from? How long do they serve? What guidelines do you suggest for their behavior? (I have been a Ranger and you haven't—I was a Ranger befor ethe Charter, like Eru—and believe me, guidelines are necessary for the Ranger's own peace of mind.)

Keep in mind also that the board soundly rejected the idea of electing Rangers. Where do we get them, since we have to have them to keep the board running? What does the board do if one misbehaves?

Everything is more complicated than I think you realize, Hal. Everything has implications, and every power you give someone over someone else opens an opportunity for abuse. One reason the charter is so complex was all the controls on power we tried to build into it.

And I think the problem is that the ONLY way to get people to listen to you is to be on a committee.

I don't think this is the way things are supposed to work, or actually work, which is why the parallel threads exist.

Frankly I'm sick of people saying I don't care enough if I don't get on a committee. I daresay I spend more time on this board than almost all of the members. That's part of the problem people have with me, because I "always get involved."

Just because I disagree with the process things happen in, does not mean I do not contribute. People use the fact that I'm not "on the committee" to say I don't care enough, which I find quite wrong.

I daresay I spend more time on this board than almost all of the members. That's part of the problem people have with me, because I "always get involved."

No, hal, it's because your input is always negative.

Jn

TheMary wrote:

Voronwe you are a lovely Loremaster you know

Thanks, TM. I try.

I don't have all your answers, Prim, but you're approaching it from the concept that people will want to be rangers and want to abuse the power that gives them.

If we can't operate under a set of principles that drives coexistance and fellowship for all the members, there's no point in any of it. If we really NEED to FORCE people to stay in line, then it's not goign to work no matter what system we set up.

People will step out of line, it's human nature... but if the rangers act under the same set of principles as the rest of us, their actions will be acceptable.

hal, you obviously don't like the concept of commitees. I must say they bug me too. Perhaps you should try and present a comprehensive and workable alternative to decision-making. Maybe you could then present it to the board and see if people think it's a good idea.

Jnyusa wrote:

I daresay I spend more time on this board than almost all of the members. That's part of the problem people have with me, because I "always get involved."

No, hal, it's because your input is always negative.

Jn

No, it's just generally all that people notice, especially when their predisposed to seeing what I say as negative.

Two words that are really great to avoid in arguments:

"always" and "never"

Right you are, Eru. I thought about that after posting it and was going to change it, then got distracted by something else.

It is because your input is overwhelmingly negative, hal. And no, that is not in our imagination.

Jn

you mean "your" imagination, don't you... I don't know who else you intend to speak for...

most of my input for your ideas is negative, Jnyusa, because we disgree so very much. I've had plenty to offer that's not negative, but it's almost universally ignored or dismissed... which gets pretty tiring actually... usually it's done because I've not "devoted enough time" or something like that. Aparently I'm not in the "elite" rule creator class. And you wonder why I don't want to be on a committee where I can be ignored all the time even more?

People, Liddy is right... Enjoy your holidays. Go put up some holly. This discussion isn't productive. Eru is right. "Always" and "never" should not be part of discussion vocabulary.

TED ... Okaaaay, make up your mind.

In response to TED's request in the Jury Room and Voronwe's several requests in this thread, I have added a poll to the Jury Room thread whether we should start now on the simply stuff or wait until January 2.

You all have posting permission in the Jury Room. Please take a moment to vote and then we'll have an 'official' decision.

Jn

halplm wrote:

most universally ignored or dismissed... which gets pretty tiring actually... usually it's done because I've not "devoted enough time" or something like that. Aparently I'm not in the "elite" rule creator class.

Re-read your "what's wrong" thread, hal - you are NOT being persecuted. Get that through your head. What kind of a segue is that? They say it's because I haven't devoted enough time, but the real reason is because they don't respect me enough? BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT. If people are telling you that your ideas aren't fully thought out, could it possibly be that, instead of them ignoring you because they hate you, that your ideas actually aren't fully thought out? I keep telling you, I tend to agree with you on this stuff, you get annoyed by a lot of the red tape-feel to a lot these processes much like I do. But just saying, "This sucks, let's do it this way instead" accomplishes nothing. NOTHING. Do you understand that? Do you understand how saying, "screw the commitee let's just put up a poll" doesn't help anything at all in the least? That there are practical problems to that sort of solution that need to be worked out and thought about and decided on. And who's going to do the working and thinking and deciding? Anyone but you?