board77

I second Voronwe's . Thank you.

Friends,

The first post in this thread is currently empty. I'm going to post there an outline of the charter so that convention members and all other members can watch our progress.

Thing is, I began numbering articles in the order in which we considered them, and there is a logical order which is not the same as the numbers I had been assigning so far. So as to avoid confusion, I am going to list the articles in their logical order, but if we have been voting on items using a particular Article number, I am not going to change that now. Things we have not address yet will be listed in the order in which they will eventually appear, but will show in the outline as Article (.).

There is also a sticky thread in the Bike Racks where members are linked to the Business Forum threads, and I will post the outline there as well.

Hope this helps us feel like we're making progress, and also know where we're going next.

Jn

Sign up HERE
to run for Admin!

Double

Jny, you had responded to my comments in two different posts, I'm replying to your first response:

Jny wrote:

TH -

•do you have a preference for time limits on the temp admins?

•double posts - we can add “upon request”

below, together with your second response.

Jnyusa wrote:

Nin - re double-posts, I think it was TH who suggested this should be at the request of the poster, and I've added your agreement to that "indigo" comment in the third post of this thread because I believe her solution would cover your concern as well.

Re deleting double posts, thanks, yes, I think "upon request" is better.
It's less a question of too much power, more that I just don't think it should be among their routine duties. Like someone else said, posters can delete or, if someone has posted afterwards, edit their own posts, and a double post is no harm to anyone, so it seems a bit ridiculous to have an admin intervene. I think if I noticed an admin had gone to the trouble of deleting a double post of mine, I'd just go , rather than being happy about it or so. Unless it's on request, it seems a pedantic thing to do to me.

Quote:

It has been asked how practical it will be, really, for a full admin to be working together with a training admin. I can imagine people forming very short term teams like this for training purposes (one afternoon perhaps), but we do not in fact want trainees alone on the board doing all kinds of stuff without supervision because then they are effectively a full admin. Perhaps, instead of saying at the top of the list of routine powers that training admins can do these things too, we can add at the bottom of the list a final bullet which says, for example:

• admins-in-training may have their admin powers enabled and exercise routine powers under the supervision of a full admin. Admin powers will be disenabled when the training session is over.

Would that ease concerns?

I hadn't commented on the admin-in-training part before, sorry about that, had meant it for later, but, yes, this is much better than just allowing them routine powers.

Quote:

TH - would you be happier about new forums if the majority of admins had to agree to it, as opposed to there having to be a thread in the business forum?

Yes, that would be a good compromise. Much better than having it in the power of a single admin to create a forum at will.

Though I still don't understand why it would be so inacceptable to have a thread about it first, as that's also what's required for other changes to the layout.
(Admins may not: • delete smileys or change the style of the board without allowing members to express their opinion beforehand in a Business Forum thread)
Maybe it could just be recommended that admins ask the membership when it comes to creating forums? I mean, it depends on the nature of the planned forum how much difference it will make to the board, I think - so I would hope that if the admins think it's a bigger deal, they would want to ask the members for input first.

Quote:

Re temp admins, I would follow Prim's choice and vote for two week terms with one renewal.

And I would agree that a majority of admins would have to agree to something (and now I forgot what it is) rather than all of them having to agree.

I don't really have a clear preference on whether it should be one week or two-week terms, my point was that I thought all admins had to agree on this. That's because my own "worst case scenario" was one admin appointing some friend of theirs for "emergency admin" without there being a real emergency, just for fun or so.
Prim's "worst case scenario" was rather convincing, too, though, so maybe "a majority agreement" is fine, too.

TH - thanks for answering about all those items.

Though I still don't understand why it would be so inacceptable to have a thread about it first, as that's also what's required for other changes to the layout.

Personally, I don't see that it matters one way or the other, but the debate over this was so large and some people felt rather strongly that the members should not have to be involved in this. I know that your concern was arbitrary action by an admin, and that's why I thought we might arrive at a compromise on this particular issue, where members don't have to be involved in a formal way but an admin can't act alone either. If this satisfies your concern, I think that by adopting the compromise we can avoid another debate during ratification.

Meanwhile I'll edit in to the third post your support for the other options.

Jn

Sign up HERE
to run for Admin!

This is on a relativley unrelated topic, but based on Jyn's email, if the membership is growing impatient, perhaps we should run several threads at once? I don't see a problem with it.

ANOTHER SPECIAL NOTICE

This will go out by email as well.

I've been conferring with members of the convention about ways to make this process more efficient.

1. There is now a sticky thread with the voting schedule. Although I cannot predict in advance how long a discussion will last, and there are a number of good reasons for not fixing a time limit to discussion, I almost always put up a draft ballot for review at least 24 hours before a vote begins. So the warning of an upcoming vote will go into that thread when the draft ballot goes up, an email will go out, and everyone will have 48 hours in which to schedule their time to vote.

2. I would like to introduce the following flexibility: if you know that a vote is going to begin and end during a time when you are not available, you may email your ballot to me early. But please do this by email so that I have a written record of your vote. When your ballots are posted in the thread, I make a copy of the post before adding the votes to the tally so that we always have two source documents for comparison in case a vote is questioned. This has already come in handy when a vote was changed so I am going to keep doing it.

3. We have already begun discussing Special Powers in this thread, so the discussion will continue here and I will move that portion of the agenda into the second and third post as soon as I am able to remove the current stuff into a voting thread. But I am going to ask Alandriel to start the thread and lead the discussion on Admin Code of Conduct so that these topics can proceed simulataneously.

4. When those two votes are done we will have finished the article on Administrators. We will then begin the ratification process for the first two articles. Article 1: Member Moderation, and Article 2: Administrators.

5. The ratification process takes 20 days. While that is going on we will do the following:
...a. We will replace convention members who have left.
.......(i) There are certain people I would like to add to the convention specifically for the portion on Juries.
.......(ii) There are people who have expressed an interest in participating, and this is a convenient time to let them in

...b. Some of you may be thoroughly bored by this process and want out. If you want to take a break at this point, and rejoin the convention at the next convenient breaking point - which will be after Jury stuff and Mayor stuff is done and before we consider Mission Statement, etc. - you may do so. No harm, no foul. You don't have to come back later, but you can.

...c. When we start Jury stuff, we will run more than one paragraph at a time. We will run as many as we can handle independently. So I will be asking for discussion leaders. Whoever leads the discussion needs to open the thread and reserve two or three posts at the top for evolving language, ballots, etc. and then keep it updated. Membership has already considered this issue as well, so I have prior decisions to give you that you can paste in, and of course that portion of the agenda will go in the thread as well. Please start thinking now about whether you would be willing to help with this.

Thanks!

Jn

Belated edit.

I just realized that I forgot about agenda items: How to Contest the Decision of an Admin, and Removing an Admin from Office.

Can we run four topics simulataneously? Are people up for that? Would anyone volunteer to be thread leader once the votes that are imminent have been cleared from the agenda?

Jn

Jn, I'd volunteer in a heartbeat, but I don't think I could keep track of one more thing at the moment.

Though it would be fun to run the thread on how to get rid of an admin.

I'll volunteer to be thread leader fo the Removal of an Admin from Office.

The Valar will bless you for this Faramond!

Some work has already been done on this and I will email you what I've got in about three hours, when the voting on other stuff begins and I can clean up the first three posts a bit.

We also need someone to be thread leader for: How to Contest the Decision of an Admin. There is preliminary text for this, too, which I can email to any willing soul.

Jn

Hmmh, no further replies in almost three hours.

It sounds a daunting task, but also an interesting one.
I do have the time, so I could help, if no one else shows up for whom it doesn't seem like such a scary task to do.
(And provided the doctor can cure my ears tomorrow - will let you know then, or, as I said, if someone else shows up, no problem. )

Truehobbit - you're hired!

And I'm glad you volunteered because you're a well-organized person.

I was explaining to Faramond earlier that ever since discussions began in the business forum about by-laws ... like, mid-February ... I've just been copying everyone's comments and ideas into different topic files on my computer. Not all of it was put into the agenda because it would have made the agenda too long, and I can no longer identify which ideas belong to which people. BUT - I do have these files full of other people's ideas, and there is a short file on How to Contest the Decisions of an Admin which I will email to you promptly.

You can start the thread whenever you want. I usually reserve at least the first two posts for (1) the ballot and (2) the points that evolve through discussion. So you can put "future ballot" in the first post, and in the second post paste the stuff I'll send you plus any comments you want to make.

Thanks again!

Jn

p.s. To all members: I am now going to clean up the second and third post of this thread to get ready for the next vote. I will be putting the paragraph on Routine Powers in more readable form.

Thanks, Jny - I don't think I've been called "well-organised" very often! (My method is more one of "productive chaos". )

Well, my ears are unblocked, feels wonderful to hear properly again, so I'm ready to give it a try!

This discussion is now officially moving into Special and Emergency Powers of Admins: Second and Third Post are Updated Routinely

There has been quite a bit of discussion about this already two or three pages back. I'll try to pull those ideas forward. Hang on.

*** Apologies for plagiarizing everyone's posts, but this way we can start fresh on this page *****

Voronwe said:

Admins have power to ban immediately: all points
Agreed. No bans should be irreversibly permanent

Admins have power to convene a hearing to reverse a ban
• at least (a)six months (b) one year has elapsed since the ban went into effect [it should be as long as the longest temp ban we enact]
Six months. [I take this to mean that V. does not want any ban to last longer than six months.]

Extraordinary Powers of Admins
Such measures are temporary by their nature and subject to review by some body as yet to be determined
I think we need some kind of "Court of Appeals" as I have said before, that only has the power to determine whether a jury or admins have abused their discretion.

Poster has the Right to a Hearing: all points
Definitely agree.

Alandriel said
- Court of appeals (under 'emergency' measures not otherwise covered in the constitution). I like V's suggestion very much. Could it not also function in a way similar to the jury system (but of course seperate and not involving the same members?) A jury of the admin/jury if necessary so to speak?

Axordil said
I agree--no forever bans. It would deny us the pleasure of turning down some folks over and over again.

Well, you guys wanted to discuss multiple topics at once. In the past 48 hours this topic hasn't been touched.

Jn

I already said my piece on this subject.

I'm sorry, Jn--I hope to be able to catch up over the next day or two. My ISP has been unreliable for the past week, including several long outages, and work is bad.

Thanks for letting me know, Prim. You've been very faithful to the committee.

Jn

Sorry, Jny, as said somewhere in the Turf, my Internet time has been cut a bit short, because my father in law has broken his pelvis when skiing and I have to squeeze a daily visit in hospital in my schedule.

And I know when I asked for it, I underestimated the quantity of things to read - I do my best to keep up several times daily, and have decided only to give input, when I really think I have something to add... and I think several other commitee member do the same, more or less silent read.