board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Simplification Committee Comment Thread 2

Post Reply   Page 1 of 9  [ 179 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 3 4 59 »
Author Message
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject: Simplification Committee Comment Thread 2
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 12:20 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
This is for comments from the members on the simplification process. Comments, complaints, suggestions, etc, are to be made here. Please keep the spam to a minimum, though I understand the nature of osgiliathation.

Could a ranger sticky this thread when one gets the chance?

Thanks.

------------------

Current Committee Discussion Topics

Deletion of Unnecessary Articles:
  • Article 11 (all or just ad hoc?)
  • Article 10
  • Ownership section
Simplification/Slimming down of current articles:
  • Expanding article I to include the mission statement and the key principles.
  • Slimming down of the key principles.

---------------

*Topics will be added as they arise. This will be the master list for the current topics and articles being discussed so it is easier for the members to follow along.

Please keep the tangents to a minimum.

Please sticky this, ranger. Thank you.

Last edited by TheEllipticalDisillusion on Tue 10 Jan , 2006 10:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Anthriel
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 12:34 am
Seeking my nitid muliebrity
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun 20 Feb , 2005 4:15 pm
 
Is this thread okay for questions about the charter simplification process?


Edit: OOPS, that looks snotty. :oops: But what I meant was, is this thread really to be reserved only for comments about what is going on in the committee? TED, you didn't list "questions" as one of the defining characterics of this thread... are questions about why we are doing this at all inappropriate here?

If that is true, I can understand the discomfort with some of the discussion in the other thread...

:hug: TED...


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 12:43 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Yes, I'm sorry I didn't list it, but questions are perfectly acceptable here if they have to do with the committee. Discussion about recent dramas, causes of recent dramas, effects of recent dramas are not acceptable. Some say stricter works better, so I'm being strict.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Anthriel
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 12:51 am
Seeking my nitid muliebrity
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun 20 Feb , 2005 4:15 pm
 
Oh, I don't mind if you flex those big ole' strict muscles with me. I'm not a very good rebel... generally, if I break a rule, it's because I didn't know about it. Kinda pathetic, really... :oops:

BUT, since questions are okay :):

In the other thread, you said that you wanted to streamline the charter because it was so wordy, and legal-sounding. I think I agree with that.

Are there any other ways that you would like to simplify the charter? How would this simpler Charter look?

Others have mentioned making it one page or less. Others have proposed just a few lines, with obvious rules barring criminal behavior. Is simple brevity our goal?

What do you think that simplifying the Charter will accomplish for the board? (You've already mentioned making it easier to read for the members... again, a good point, in my book).

In other words, what are our goals here, and what do we hope to achieve when we reach these goals?



I am an INFJ, by the way. In case anyone was wondering. ;)


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 12:59 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Honestly, I think the charter should take up no more than one or two pages (8.5 X 11). Like a resume, the charter should be simple and to the point this way new members can read it quickly to know what is and is not acceptable at b77.

What would it look like? I haven't thought that far ahead. Something easy to read. Maybe bullet-pointed.. maybe in the form of a story... or a play... I dunno.

I don't have very high hopes for what simplifying the thing would accomplish. Perhaps it won't seem like a burden to some. Also, maybe we can get closer to fitting the charter to the posters rather than the other way around (this is a pipe dream, I know). That won't just happen by fixing the charter, I know this. I might not say everything I'm thinking, but I generally consider the pros and cons more than some might think.

I think a lot of what is in the charter is good stuff that is useful, but it's difficult to comprehend at times. I wasn't doing this committee as an affront to those who came before me, but I looked at it as a writer and thought, okay... we have this document, it's been written, time to flex our editing muscles. James Joyce did this with Ulysses. Hemmingway did this kind of stuff, too.

Also, I wanted to get rid of useless pieces that either serve no purpose or don't work.

Anything else I can help you with, dearie? Inxayed.

Last edited by TheEllipticalDisillusion on Sat 07 Jan , 2006 1:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Anthriel
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 1:13 am
Seeking my nitid muliebrity
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun 20 Feb , 2005 4:15 pm
 
Quote:
Honestly, I think the charter should take up no more than one or two pages (8.5 X 11).
And the font size would be? :P
Quote:
Also, maybe we can get closer to fitting the charter to the posters rather than the other way around (this is a pipe dream, I know).
See, THIS is the type of stuff I don't understand. Charter v1.0 was created mainly, in my impression, to make sure EVERYONE had a chance for equal input. After our collective TORC experience, having a "voice" come down from on high was to be avoided; democracy was the goal. How was that "not fitting the posters"?

I realize that this question might be seen as inflammatory. Please trust me that I do not mean it to be. I'm just truly confuzzled on this point, and so many of you are so clear on it. PM me, maybe?

Quote:
Maybe bullet-pointed..
OOOooo. Bullet points give me goose bumps.

:Wooper:
Quote:
I wasn't doing this committee as an affront to those who came before me,
You know what, TED? That NEVER occurred to me. Even the constitution of the United States got amended. Improvements are almost always possible, in any system.
Quote:
time to flex our editing muscles

OOOOOOOooooo. Editing muscles give me goosebumps, too.

:horse:
Quote:
Also, I wanted to get rid of useless pieces that either serve no purpose or don't work.
And THAT is just plain good sense.



And ixnay on the idingray apschay talk. That was PRIVATE, remember? :P


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 1:19 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Ixnayed. Happy? :D ;)

I'll think about what you asked and get back to you, Anthy.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 1:30 am
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
I have some questions.
There have been different responses from different committee members with regards to the purpose and manner the committee will carry out this business.
Some say the purpose is to make the charter easier to read. Some say it needs to be streamlined. Others feel it needs to be totally rewritten.

What is the official objective of this committee?

Is it just simplification or is it a rewrite?

Will there be changes made to reverse language currently in the charter?

Will you be taking into account the thoughts of the membership at large or are all of you just putting forth your own ideas?

How does it help the committee decide what to do by ignoring tangent thoughts and criticisms by labelling them bullshit?

Do you feel the makeup of the committee is balanced? In other words, does the committee represent a cross sampling of the membership?

There seems to be some doubt and misunderstanding of exactly what is going on.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Elian
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 1:38 am
Let the dice fly.
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3201
Joined: Sun 30 Jan , 2005 8:24 pm
Location: Still flying
 
I beleive that's what we're tying to figure out in the jury room thread right now, Holby. :)


As for balance of the committe, yes, I beleive it is, if only because I know most of the members of it well enough to have faith in them. In any case, even if it isn't balanced, a balanced membership will vote on whatever we come up with...if they don't feel it's balanced, it won't be passed. Simple as that.

_________________

What does it take
to stop getting carried away
by the force of my love...


Top
Profile Quote
MaidenOfTheShieldarm
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 2:49 am
Another bright red day
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2402
Joined: Sat 12 Mar , 2005 10:35 pm
Location: Far from the coast of Utopia
 
Holbytla wrote:
What is the official objective of this committee?

Is it just simplification or is it a rewrite?
I'm also curious about this. It seems that the committee doesn't agree, and that that should be the first thing to figure out.

My impression was that it was to simplify the Charter and make it more spirit of the law than letter of the law, if you know what I mean--less fiddly details to quarrel over.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 3:04 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14774
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
Don't know how helpful this will be, but primary gripe with the current Charter is how cumbersome it is to make simple adjustments. It took weeks, if not months, to propose a very minor change to the Bike Racks text that was ultimately shot down anyways. Something like that should take a week or two, not a month or two, and do so without sucking up hours and hours of some posters time. I know that there were good reasons for making it so cumbersome - the desire to allow every viewpoint a voice as well as avoiding constant changes every other week - but this isn't issues of national security we're dealing with so I feel the safeguarding is way overdone. If the BR issue had been resolved in two weeks, a lot of damage might have been prevented (yes, I said might). In other words, I think we need more flexibility.


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 6:12 am
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
I will second Yov.
I was on the original committee and I always thought the original too cumbersome and lenghthy. Most do now.
The charter does need simplification.
I really believe the best way to achieve that is to have a person of quality in charge.
Someone who can relegate authority, and someone who is implicitly trustworthy.
I really believe that if we have to moderate ourselves, the system breaks down.
I can in no way shape or form moderate Katie or Anthy if the need should arise. I just could not do it. And I am a hard ass ranger of yore.

Could you moderate your friends?

The system is broke but not in the way people see it.

And my motivation in all of this is to tell the truth as I see it. Not to be a pain in the ass.

Friends tell the hard truth to each other.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 7:13 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Holby,

The official objective, in my view, has been laid out. Obviously, this might not sync up with everyone. Call it poor chairpersonship. I don't care. Know this, I'm working on this. I will put forth things I agree with and things I do not agree with because overall I truly believe in democracy (even as an American citizen), more so than most people here would know.
Quote:
Will you be taking into account the thoughts of the membership at large or are all of you just putting forth your own ideas?

How does it help the committee decide what to do by ignoring tangent thoughts and criticisms by labelling them bullshit?
I will be taking into account anyone's ideas. If you think I wouldn't, you don't know me very well. I'm sorry I called the original thread bullshit, but if you'd like to summarize you and hal's bickerfest into a short post of the ideas presented, I'd be more than happy to read it. I think it's unfair to assume that I want to read you and another poster's bicker about this and that and then try to sift out the ideas from the bullshit.
Quote:
I really believe the best way to achieve that is to have a person of quality in charge.
Someone who can relegate authority, and someone who is implicitly trustworthy.
Do you mean in charge of the committee or in charge of b77? I'll refrain from reading any further into this comment until you've posted.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 7:31 am
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
TED first thing you should know is that I trust you and I think you are an honorable guy. Honestly.
So lets go from there.
Quote:
The official objective, in my view, has been laid out
It may have been , but it my belief that the average poster and some committee members are not aware of this. I do think that needs to be implicitly stated to all. I think also that all committee members need to be on the same page.

The bickerfest amounts to this.
I think the problem with this place is not the charter but the actions of people. Tosh said it best. The charter or any charter is squat without good behavior. I think that has been the problem with this place. The behavior and not the so called rules.
No amount of rules are going to change a person's behavior.
No matter how clear.
While this endeavor you are undertaking has its merits, all will fail if the people are not willing to buy into the community aspect of tolerance and respect.


Quote:
I really believe the best way to achieve that is to have a person of quality in charge.
Someone who can relegate authority, and someone who is implicitly trustworthy.


Do you mean in charge of the committee or in charge of b77? I'll refrain from reading any further into this comment until you've posted.
_________________
I was referring to the board in the whole.
No way am I going to tell Katie or Anthy or one of my close friends that they are banned. No way.
I really believe that there has to be a cop in charge. Someone that is not friends with the posters here.
Otherwise people will be faced with doing what is right or friendship.
This has already happened so I am not giving you hypotheticals.

Whatever TED.
I do trust you and I hope for the best.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 7:43 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Quote:
It may have been , but it my belief that the average poster and some committee members are not aware of this. I do think that needs to be implicitly stated to all. I think also that all committee members need to be on the same page.
I thought I laid it out fairly clearly a few times, but now... read my post in response to Anthy (this is aimed at anyone still with confusion). My apologies if I was unclear.

Holby, I agree with you about the rules and posters. The rules will do no good if the posters are mean to each other. Luckily, I think that has passed by and large.

If anyone has any suspicions about me, let me do what I can to lay those suspicions to rest here. I love democracy more than anything. I truly and naively believe it can work. I am more than will to lose and vote or fight for a proposal I don't exactly agree with in the name of democracy. I feel like I'm writing an election speech... I'm not here to rewrite the charter in my view only. I want every member of the board to give a suggestion or voice a complaint.

I am doing my best and I will continue despite anything that happens.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 7:50 am
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
Quote:
I thought I laid it out fairly clearly a few times, but now... read my post in response to Anthy
Oh look TED.
Nobody wants to envision Anthy in CHAPS more than I do.
But what does Anthy in CHAPS have to do with the charter? Really now.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 8:01 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Holbytla wrote:
Quote:
I thought I laid it out fairly clearly a few times, but now... read my post in response to Anthy
Oh look TED.
Nobody wants to envision Anthy in CHAPS more than I do.
But what does Anthy in CHAPS have to do with the charter? Really now.
Ixnay.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Anthriel
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 3:14 pm
Seeking my nitid muliebrity
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun 20 Feb , 2005 4:15 pm
 
:Q

Ahem.

The entire incident referred to in the posts above (heretofore known as "I said IXNAY, dammit!") was played out (so to speak) on PM, WHICH, as I recall, means PRIVATE messages. It had to do with me learning an important fact about TED, which reminded me of an important fact about my riding chaps.

The rest of the details of that conversation are PRIVATE, dammit, ixnay, by the way, but I just have to say that from here on out, every time I look at my well-worn riding chaps, I'm gonna think of TED.


:D

About the CHARTER SIMPLIFICATION, which is, after all, the POINT OF THIS THREAD, I must say that I am impressed with the organization of goals that TED presented. I am an INFJ, heavy on the "J", and it just bugs me to read such divergent opinions about what this committee is supposed to be doing.

I am glad that Holby is making sure that we understand what I feel is obvious, here. The recent ugliness on this board was not a fault of the current Charter. Cleaning up the Charter is a good goal... it does feel unfriendly to read... but substituting one set of rules for another will not protect us from what we endured.

I'm not sure what will, actually. :(


Cookies?


Top
Profile Quote
LalaithUrwen
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 4:18 pm
The Grey Amaretto as Supermega-awesome Proud Heretic Girl
Offline
 
Posts: 21757
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 3:46 pm
 
I like cookies.


I think most of us are getting at the same thing; there's just a confusion of words.

Holby, who would this person in charge be? Who could it be? I'm not asking to be snotty, because I think it's a decent idea. I'm just trying to figure out how it could even be accomplished.


Lali

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Holbytla
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 07 Jan , 2006 7:53 pm
Grumpy cuz I can be
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6642
Joined: Thu 09 Dec , 2004 3:07 am
 
Lali I am not sure it could be accomplished.

I just think there are inherent flaws in the system as it now stands.

I wish I had a better answer.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 9  [ 179 posts ]
Return to “Business Room” | Jump to page 1 2 3 4 59 »
Jump to: