[Theforum] Re: Charter Gaps

[Daniel J. Cody]

On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, isaac wrote:
> 
> > not one for X, another for Y, and yet another for Z. this is just my
> > opinion to those already firing up their email editors.
> 
> so, one list/group combining what is now theforum (direction), admin
> (administrative functions), thesite (implementation), theprocess (err,
> stuff)?
> would that be your preferred scenario?

actually, my prefered process would be a merger(like i mentioned
before) of the administrative and discussion lists.

this is really all i've ever wanted: a way for regular evolt members who
want to contribute "more" to do so. some would rather write code to
contribute "more", thesite. others have no coding skills and would rather
edit(as em mentioned) and approve articles, themerger(my name for the
merger of this and admin lists). if a person wants to contribute "more" by
sharing their 'Executive' expertise, they could run for the BOD or
whatever.

my point is that one group(*admin*) shouldn't pick and choose people to
decide who gets to contribute 'more'. its an individual choice and
something people can do on their own.

> of those lists/groups, admin has had closed archives. that has been due to
> sensitivity issues regarding discussion of incoming articles, etc. would you
> make all of that open, or keep it isolated somewhat? (if open, then people
> will be seeing: "this article is quite poor. deny?")

well if it *is* a quite poor article, it is. nothing you can do about it i
guess. that shows up by the fact that it got denied. what it would also do
is ensure people don't deny aticles because, "M$ bl0wz! d3ny the @rt12cl1
j00 f00!" but rather, "Poor content, no relevant info added to an obvious
press release".

not that thats ever happened or anything, but an extreme example.
 
> would there be any entry requirements to the proposed merged group?
> 
> for example, could anyone join and start deleting articles and being a
> general nuisance? or would they be voted/nominated in and included on a
> basis of trust? ("oh yeh, i recognise head lemur. let him in". "no, i've
> never heard of skriptkiddie, how long has she been with evolt.org?", etc)

i know you've brought this up before :) no we wouldn't just give joe user
root to the boxes or priviledges to articles. we don't do that now on
thesite list, and thats a good model for how it would work IMO.

someone joins. they lurk(or not) and learn how things work. if they're
really joining for the rigth reasons(to contribute back to evolt,
yadda.) they'll stick around. then they'll post an opinion or a solution
to a problem or offer to help out in some way. lather, rinse, repeat.
after a while, we get to know this person and trust them. they've proven
that they have the ability to responsibly edit/approve/deny articles or
answer emails.  this has worked out very nice on thesite in more than 4
cases, and i'm sure it would work in this scenerio.
 
> > merger. i know there are a lot of people on this list, although quiet
> > right now, could do an awesome job doing the things 'admin' has always
> > done - answering emails sent through our site, editing and approving
> > articles on the website, advocating evolt, etc.
> 
> yes, i agree.
> 
> but should we recycle admins (remove quiet ones to bring in fresh ones), or
> merge groups?
> 
> i'd do the former. separate lists enables people to participate in one way,

see above about tehsite/thislist

thanks iSac for the conversation.. you always have in depth and
interesting questions, hopefully i answered most of them for ya :)

.djc.