[Theforum] (was) let's kill it

[Marlene Bruce]

Hey Michelle,

I do understand that you were trying to help, and I appreciate your
willingness to do so. Please don't misunderstand my email. I'm not
really addressing the conflict that arose from your help, I'm more
addressing the fact that this problem of toe-stepping will go on ad
infinitum if we don't get process in place.

>I come from the "old school" .. if you can do it,
>do it yourself... don't ask others to do things you are able to do.  But
>whatever .. next time (oh there won't be .. but if there were) .. then I'll
>follow the above procedure and *HOPE* that someone sends the person a
>message.

Nothing wrong with wanting to make sure someone is responded to.

I understand coming from the old school. I don't know why the email
went unanswered.

If it's partly because some people who used to have access don't, it
doesn't make it right for someone who *shouldn't* have access to do
the responding because they discover their access is still there.

Doing it yourself regardless of the mutually accepted procedure (by
you too) is kind-of a no-no. Can you see where I'm coming from?

>It was there .. I had
>a few minutes, so I did it.  Now I won't bother.

I don't think anyone has a problem with your intentions! It's the
fact that you'd previously agreed that taking rights without
responsibility was inappropriate, and you'd relinquished the right to
be an admin and participate in admin duties.

Can you see why this was bothersome to at least one of the currently
instated admins? I know you wanted to help, but it continues a
precedent that is uncomfortable to many of the other people.

Why you were given privileges and you aren't an admin, and Adrian
*is* an admin and doesn't have privileges is a very important
question that needs answering.

>I thought there was a
>"goal" that all messages get responded to within 24 hours?

You're absolutely right, they should be...

...by those who've accepted the responsibility to do so. If you had
called them to task on their responsibility, or inquired *why* no-one
had answered the email, or if you had rejoined admin and taken care
of the problem, those would have been a much more supportable actions
on your part.

>I just figured
>it was one that no one was sure how to answer best,

May I suggest that you don't make that assumption, and request that
you inquire first in the future? I mean this most delicately and
respectfully.

>so I did what I knew Dan
>would have done.  Oh well.

Regardless of whether Dan would have done it or not is not part of
the equation, at least in my mind.

>Anyway.. my entire point is that I was *asked* to help out with some of
>Dan's work load, which has been spread out over a couple of others.

That also shouldn't factor into this issue. In the mind of many of us
it's not Dan's place to dole out responsibility as he sees fit. Isn't
this a group effort? Or is Dan the ruler of how evolt is run and who
runs it?

See, this is how the thinking can go. This lack of process is *so*
divisive. We just want to avoid all this stuff and get the job done.

How is this kind of approach freeing us up to be creative and productive?

Lack of process is having the absolute opposite effect.

>I didn't even realize I had my access on the a.e.o. interface reset
>to answer emails until I went to see if I could get the person who
>was having the problem's email address to look up the error.

I'm not sure how that relates to the point I'm making. I'm not
chiding you, I'm saying we need to agree on what the boundaries are
so we don't overstep them.

Thanks,
Marlene