[Theforum] Re: (was) let's kill it, kill, kill, kill!

aardvark roselli at earthlink.net
Thu Apr 18 14:15:22 CDT 2002

>From: "John Handelaar" <genghis at members.evolt.org>
> [For the benefit of those who didn't listen to the ever-more-
> drunken conversations in question, it was about how Admin comes
> over to lots of people as very cliquey indeeeeed, even though
> no-one means it to.]

i mean to.*

> Bluntly, the existence of something called 'Admin' isn't nearly
> as damaging, IMHO, as the closed group it represents. The
> avalanche of personal crap which keeps spilling out from all
> sides all over this list, thesite, #evolt is of interest only
> to (some of) that (very small) minority and turns otherwise-
> willing people with time, skills and bucketloads of experience
> right off evolt.org altogether.  I very much doubt that it'll
> stop anytime soon, unfortunately, Admin group or no Admin group.

agreed... the conflict is off-putting, which i think is why dan has
done this stuff on the side... that's not an accusation, because i
might consider doing the very same thing (although i doubt i'd
follow through)... but if you can avoid the infighting by making
decisions without letting those who always challenge you see
those decisions, it's so much easier...

it's also not how an open community runs...

> In my opinion, 'legitimately-made' decisions regarding evolt.org
> should involve as many community members as possible.  They are
> *not*.  And that goes for NFP registrations just as much as it
> does for list admin duties.  Most of us have never been consulted on
> either.

NFP was first broached as a topic at SXSW in austin in 2001 by
dan to the rest of admin...

since then, i've brought it up here when i first formed theforum so
that it *could* be completely community-driven...  theforum is just
for what you say we don't have, which means one of us isn't getting
the info communicated well enough (probably me)...

but this is where anyone can weigh in on that stuff...

> And (sorry, Martin, this is a direct criticism of you,
> but a very gentle one) I'll take Michele's attempt at blue-skying at
> the moment over the Access page on the wiki, though for only one
> reason.  If it were blank or nearly blank I'd agree we should be doing
> it there for transparency.  But it's not.  It defines roles and dishes
> ____all____ of them to people who are or were members of
> admin at lists.evolt.org before this year began.

for context, that's only because the discussion started on admin...
we wanted to figure out who had what access, and see who wanted
to help out in what ways...  it's hard to open stuff up if you don't
know who's already got what, and it's easier to do that in a small
group before parading it out to everyone else -- at least until this
group displaces that small group...

> Suggestion:  let's do this on the wiki _but_ restructure the
> page to reflect what Michele was trying to do, namely to
> get everyone to tell us and each other what they'd like to
> contribute.  It's an entirely valuable exercise even in
> isolation from the access issues.

go for it -- it's a wiki...

> And aren't we overdue for London Beervolt 4?  Or is it
> 5? :-)

losing count already?  had too much to drink that you can't
remember them all?  hmmm... i should fly to london...

[*that was a joke, just in case...]

More information about the theforum mailing list