View Full Version : .Orgers outside the usergroup
I know the new user group has just got established, but what about everyone else's opinions and thoughts on how we might like the forum moderated etc? Maybe you can reply to this thread with your own thoughts and ideas and the mods and user group people can read and take note, but not add their own opinions.
Billy Boy
15-Dec-06, 14:16
Isnt the user group there to work as a sort of go between, between the mods/admin and the users themselves?
I dont think it has been very well explained exactley what they are going to be doing, maybe niall or colin will tell us.
I dont have a clue what this user group is for either. I know votes were going on but I will admit to not voting as I didnt have a clue what was going on. I will just use forums as normal. Not too bothered what this user group is all about!
porshiepoo
15-Dec-06, 17:35
The usergroup has been set up solely for the benefit of every member of caithness.org.
The intentions of the usergroup were explained in another thread but as this thread went on for quite a few pages and became disjointed I guess it got confusing as to what it's objectives and aims were in the first place.
Basically we're here to work on behalf of the forum members to work toward a more agreeable forum that works and is enjoyed by every single one of it's members.
Initially we hope to go through the forum tems and condition and it's rules and regulations to see what needs to be changed or modified in order for the forum members to have a clearer and better understanding of these things and for us all to be assured that they are working in everyone's favour for the betterment of the forum.
This all came about as a result of recent events on here which left many of us agrieved as to whether this was a forum we even wanted to participate in anymore.
Now with the introduction of this usergroup, most of us feel that the forum can begin to recover what we feel may have been lost and even excel what at what it has been to us all in the past.
Once we have the ground rules firmly established and agreeable to all those it concerns then we hope (as far as I'm aware) to establish some new moderators, voted for and nominated by all the forum members.
These new mods will obviously then have their own agenda to discuss and work toward.
If you take a look on the usergroup forum over the next few days you will see us usergroup members discussing ways in which we would like to move forward and what we suggest in order to achieve that aim.
Although only usergroup members can post on that thread, it should hopefully become a source of information for all those who wish to take an active part in the future of the caithness.org forum.
Anyone that has any queries or suggestions regarding any of this is more than welcome to pm (or email where available) any of the usergroup members and although we can't promise to agree with you, every suggestion will be taken into account and given equal consideration.
Obviously everyone will be kept aware of the progress of the usergroup.
Remember, the usergroup is here for the benefit of every member so use us, that's what we're here for.
Royster1911
15-Dec-06, 17:58
Well, thats made it clear then:~(
The .org worked very well until the admin made a moderators group (un-intentional). Why not just sack the mods who overstep their authority (or ALL of them?) and go back to the .org we used to have. All this user group amounts to is another level of moderators albeit a watered down version.
Well, thats made it clear then:~(
The .org worked very well until the admin made a moderators group (un-intentional). Why not just sack the mods who overstep their authority (or ALL of them?) and go back to the .org we used to have. All this user group amounts to is another level of moderators albeit a watered down version.
Not at all, Royster1911.........heaven forbid!
We have no more moderating authority than you do......that's not what we are about at all!
weeboyagee
15-Dec-06, 18:18
All this user group amounts to is another level of moderators albeit a watered down version.
Oh dear - am I heading for the sack before I have even started the job yet? Come on Royster1911, if you have read the post from porshiepoo you will realise that the forum could not continue in the manner that it was doing following recent events. Action was called for quite clearly in the thread porshiepoo is referring to. Kaishowing ran the poll and the result showed that:
54% voted for the setting up of a usergroup
43% didn't care so long as things calmed down
3% were happy with the status quo.
Assuming that the 43% that don't care will not care that a usergroup has been set up, I think that I can fairly say that 97% are happy that the usergroup is in existence. So why not join the majority of that poll and see if we can better the forum as already outlined by porshiepoo?
Once the usergroup has managed to get it's feet on the ground - which will take a couple of days, the format of it's function can be formally agreed, communicated and acknowledged. The admin and moderators will give a fairly close ear to what we gather and put forward. The section for our representations is viewable by everybody.
If the forum carried on with everyone complaining to the admin in the manner they were doing, the distrust continuing with a number of moderators and the closed forum that existed between the two guardians of the forum (admin and mods) there would have been an exodus. We have moved on from all those represenations in that thread that expanded over several pages within just a few days.
Give it the chance it deserves. Let's see what we can get from it.
As a usergroup member I have no intention on "moderating" at any level and will act to represent not reprimand or control by any manner of means. 83 voted for me to be on the usergroup and I would like to think that I won't betray their trust for what they have elected me to do. :)
Maybe you can reply to this thread with your own thoughts and ideas and the mods and user group people can read and take note, but not add their own opinions.
I take it my suggestion above has been ignored then, to get opinions of ordinary .orgers!!
Most of the posts above seem to be from members of the user group.
Does this mean that my thoughts and opinions are going to be ignored then?
I take it my suggestion above has been ignored then, to get opinions of ordinary .orgers!!
Most of the posts above seem to be from members of the user group.
Does this mean that my thoughts and opinions are going to be ignored then?
No it doesn't, but so far the thread has just been producing comments about the user group.........and those questions and assumptions had to be answered so misinformation doesn't get accepted as fact.
We are open to any suggestions, thoughts and opinions.
No it doesn't, but so far the thread has just been producing comments about the user group.........and those questions and assumptions had to be answered so misinformation doesn't get accepted as fact.
We are open to any suggestions, thoughts and opinions.
You are not listening!! Yet another post by a user group member.
You have your own area for user group threads, can you not give us others this thread even?
Billy Boy
15-Dec-06, 21:19
[quote=porshiepoo;173197]
Once we have the ground rules firmly established and agreeable to all those it concerns then we hope (as far as I'm aware) to establish some new moderators, voted for and nominated by all the forum members.
These new mods will obviously then have their own agenda to discuss and work toward.
did Bill not state in a previous thread that there was going to be no new moderators as a result of this user group? or am i mistaken?
I also take it that if there is going to be new moderators that they will be voted in independantly from those who were voted in as the user group members as it would be unfair for a user group member to be a moderator aswell
You are not listening!! Yet another post by a user group member.
You have your own area for user group threads, can you not give us others this thread even?
They are still users of the forum or are you trying to say that is the only are they are now allowed to post :eek:
They are still users of the forum or are you trying to say that is the only are they are now allowed to post :eek:
???
I was just hoping for some other opinions, other than those deeper involved in the Org, that's all.
It seems it's too much to ask.
You are not listening!! Yet another post by a user group member.
You have your own area for user group threads, can you not give us others this thread even?
Given that the first two posts after your opening one asked about the user group, and the fourth post made erroneous assumptions about it........why shouldn't we post to correct/inform them.
I assure you that once there are suggestions/ideas/thoughts to be noted, we won't post.....just read.
Royster1911
15-Dec-06, 21:44
Perhaps I used the wrong description in my last post. It is however , another layer of officialdom. One that is NOT needed in my opinion. Not that my opinion matters as i`m sure that it will be discussed and chewed over by the user group and than spat out.
If the user group is our gateway to the mods, are you also the gateway for the mods to the .ogers? What purpose do you have on the org if the mods have to get you to sanction any action they want to enforce. I`m confused:confused
I take it my suggestion above has been ignored then, to get opinions of ordinary .orgers!!
Most of the posts above seem to be from members of the user group.
Does this mean that my thoughts and opinions are going to be ignored then?
Dozerboy, I read your posting with interest and I think that in Porshiepoo's excellent reply she mentioned that any member can add their ideas and contributions via a PM. All suggestions and comments will be discussed.
The role of the usergroup was quite clear (or I thought so and that is why I volunteered) that it was a group of members who care a great deal about the org and wish to return to the previous glory or even excel beyond.
All usergroup members were voted into their role during the poll. No moderation role will be made by the user group. Since the comments were aimed at the user group I think it is quite natural for us to reply, don't you?
Perhaps I used the wrong description in my last post. It is however , another layer of officialdom. One that is NOT needed in my opinion. Not that my opinion matters as i`m sure that it will be discussed and chewed over by the user group and than spat out.
If the user group is our gateway to the mods, are you also the gateway for the mods to the .ogers? What purpose do you have on the org if the mods have to get you to sanction any action they want to enforce. I`m confused:confused
It isn't another layer of officialdom..........it is a mouthpiece for the ordinary members who can, through us, get their problems, if any, with the way the forum is run looked at and, if possible, addressed.
Much better than threads complaining about what admin/mods have done which don't sit well with the members.
Opinions may well be spat out..........but only if they are unrealistic/impossible/complete fantasy. All ideas will be put forward, but I'd guess only sensible thoughtful ideas/opinions will be discussed......and I, for one would be happy to PM anyone who has made a suggestion which wasn't accepted to explain why.
The mods won't have to get us to sanction anything...what we are to do is look at the rules of the forum, amend them where the members feel necessary, and clarify the infarction system which the mods will then administer.
By using the user group, members can have input into the rules by which they post.
You just have to do it!
If you read the forums set up for user group discussions, you can maybe see both what we are about and the kinds of things we are querying. It might give you ideas......and reassure you.
Hell's Teeth. The Usergroup, as far as I can see, has not had a chance to even start to take it's first tentative step and already the knives are starting to come out preparing for the Blood Letting.
Will somebody please correct me if I am wrong but weren't the people on the Usergroup elected by a Democratic Vote open to all the ACTIVE Members of the Org so that they could try to find ways to resolve the current situation?
Was this not done so that those elected could look to see where the problems lie and to identify them in order to do this?
Was not it the idea, suggested by those who felt discontented, that a Democratically Elected Group was the best way for this to occur?
They haven't been given a chance to arrange how best to make a start, let alone hold a first meeting.
For heavens sake, let the people the whole membership were allowed to choose get on with doing the job they were chosen to do.
When there are some concrete ideas produced by the Elected Representatives of the Members that surely is the time to start any discussions about what they may or may not have come up with.
Now things are starting to move along the right track, as most members seem to accept they are, then why risk putting obstacles on the line before the train has even left the station.
They were chosen because those who voted decided that they could be trusted and were the best choice to do the job so let them get on with it without being pressurised by all and sundry.
Every Member had the opportunity to put themselves forward for the positions, people who voted and who they voted for was posted on the Forum to ensure fairness.
The choice has been made and, as far as I am concerned they should be left alone to get on with it.
Royster1911
16-Dec-06, 09:59
Dont get all upset Jaws, I am not having a go at the user group but trying to find out what their function will be. Will it be good for the .org or not?
Some people thought having moderators was a good idea but....no, we wont go there again.
I have said it before, the org worked fine in the days before mods were set up. the questions asked then was, who moderates the mods? Now we know, no-one.
I understand that the user group is going to help people put their ideas forward to make a better .org, but what was wrong going direct to the admin with your ideas?:confused
sweetheart
16-Dec-06, 11:00
On another board where i've posted for manyy thousands of posts, the
moderators, use the name 'moderator' when they are logged in taking official
actions, as to not make things personal and leave bad feelings.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/shalom/pia/rules.htm
It makes sense that we have a sort of due-process in monopoly situations,
where writers have a right to hear the charges against them, and for actions
to be taken transparently. I don't agree with rheghed at all that such things
should be taken offline. Rather, they should be handled transparently
with the right to appeal. If the User group does nothing more than
oversee all bannings and the appeal process, then it'll provide a valuable
service.
On another board where i've posted for manyy thousands of posts, the
moderators, use the name 'moderator' when they are logged in taking official
actions, as to not make things personal and leave bad feelings.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/shalom/pia/rules.htm
It makes sense that we have a sort of due-process in monopoly situations,
where writers have a right to hear the charges against them, and for actions
to be taken transparently. I don't agree with rheghed at all that such things
should be taken offline. Rather, they should be handled transparently
with the right to appeal. If the User group does nothing more than
oversee all bannings and the appeal process, then it'll provide a valuable
service.
Now I understand more with this one post than all the rest!!
Thanks Sweetheart! Hopefully the usergroup will work out for the better!
They are going to be acting sort of like a union then?? Is this right??
Dont get all upset Jaws, I am not having a go at the user group but trying to find out what their function will be. Will it be good for the .org or not?
Some people thought having moderators was a good idea but....no, we wont go there again.
I have said it before, the org worked fine in the days before mods were set up. the questions asked then was, who moderates the mods? Now we know, no-one.
I understand that the user group is going to help people put their ideas forward to make a better .org, but what was wrong going direct to the admin with your ideas?:confusedThe "Who watches the Watchers?" argument can go on for ever.
The Admin monitor the Mods is the answer to your question just as the Admin monitor the rest of the Members. The idea that the Mods are simply left to run riot is a complete red herring.
The complaint was that the members ought to have somebody watching the Mods. The usergroup was set up, comprising of people chosen by the members who made the decision that they suitable to the task in hand, to find the best way of doing that. How and what the Usergroup do is not, and should not, be laid down in stone at this stage. There jog is to find out where problems may lay and to look for suggested solutions.
Putting in place restrictions or setting out directions for them to go in at this stage is somewhat premature to say the least.
They have been set a task and have been chosen by the members to carry out that task.
Now is the time to let them get on with it!
Where does the questioning of motives and intentions stop?
We have had, "Who watches the Admin?" The Mod system was set up.
We have had, "Who watches the Mods?" The usergroup was set up.
We now have, "Who watches the Usergroup?"
What next? "Who watches the watchers who watch the watchers who watch the watchers who ...........?"
I'm not in the least upset. I understand that the original cause of all this needed to be treated with serious concern and still does.
The problem now is to prevent the whole situation descending into a complete farce whereby the original problem gets pushed to one side and nothing progresses whilst the whole thing turns into discussions about who is having discussions about people who are having discussions about members who are involved in discussions - that can go on for ever without any resolution ever being found.
That can go on until everybody gets so fed up with it that they just give up and leave.
Let those who want that carry on as they are and they will succeed.
One thing is certain, I have been a member, through good times and bad, almost since the beginning of the Forums and have watched them go from success to success.
The only way I will be leaving is when I am forcibly ejected and the door is locked, bared and bolted behind me and an armed guard put on it. I for one will be leaving to go elsewhere whatever happens!
And I am sure that there are many more members who feel the same way and will remain until either the bitter end or peace and harmony is restored.
Royster1911
17-Dec-06, 10:54
Thanks fot that posting Jaws. Now, how about giving an answer to the question. I can see an opening in the local elections for you with that answer. Body and swerve springs to mind. Oh, and when you go (Last paragraph) I will mourn your departure.
Farewell
You are not listening!! Yet another post by a user group member.
You have your own area for user group threads, can you not give us others this thread even?
Ok dozerboy .... My opinion has been called for on one point I agree with Jaws in that this contolling the contollers debate does get out of hand in some cases then we have only the problem of dealing with Members/orgers/mods that have in the view of others over stepped a rule or an agreed art of language etc. Now comes the problem how do you get the situation agreeably sorted out,,,,,, do you endlessly dicuss without an agreeable ending or do you say two wrongs and the plug is pulled or do you just pull the plug on the unsuspecting character where do go from there I think the most fruitful way forward is what I think I have seen elswhere in this thread is that the user group coordinates on rule deciding and how to resolve "Problems" with users including in that respect Mods publically diplayed remarks. and Mods continue the moderation as before, originally done by the Admin I think thats my view ?
Thanks fot that posting Jaws. Now, how about giving an answer to the question. I can see an opening in the local elections for you with that answer. Body and swerve springs to mind. Oh, and when you go (Last paragraph) I will mourn your departure.
FarewellBecause going straigh to the Admin with suggestions is the fastest way to restart the whole thing by going back to square one which would appear to be some people's idea.
They don't want progress unless it's their "progress" and that is why the people, who the full active membership decided were the ones they wanted for the job, should be allowed to get on with it.
Everybody going straight to Admin instead of having a Usergroup means the same old accusations of Cliques, Back Room Deals, the Favoured Few etc. etc. (You can make your own list) will start all over again and again and again.
The vast majority of people want this solving and solving as quickly as possible to the satisfaction of by far the largest majority of members.
For those who want to keep the problem burning and keep fanning the flames the Usergroup is considered just another obstacle to be pushed to one side and disposed of!
Does that answer your question, or would you like further enlightenment.
As for me leaving, as I have said before, no matter what the outcome, Hell will freeze over first. I will still be present to the bitter end or the "Stewards"
(read Heavy Brigade) move in and throw me out. Even then, I can assure you, I will go down fighting to try to keep the Org up and running for the enjoyment of what it is and has been!
The word "Quit!" never did have a definition which stays in my memory for longer than two seconds so don't even bother trying to teach me.
I never would make a politician, too many people don't like being given the truth!
Royster1911
17-Dec-06, 23:03
Thanks for a proper reply Jaws. Do you mean that when the .org started,it went so well that it did not need moderators? If so, why now do we now need two levels of officialdom?
It is not the case of fanning the flames as you have sugessted but rather the lack of informing us as to what this user group is actually going to be used by / for????
I dont remember using the word "stewards" but is not that what the user group is going to end up doing?
By the way, Is it not getting rather cold now:Razz
I mentioned the words "Stewards" as a result of your "Farewell" comment. I will leave when I am either put out or requested to leave the Org by Admin, other than that the only other way is when others usurp that position and use brute force to get rid of me. I ain't leaving any other way, it's as simple as that. I am here and here I will stay come Hell or High Water, Mod or no Mod.
The Usergroup currently have a Forumwhich is open for all to see and comment on as they feel fit.
Why the sudden request that people should be able to get round what they have been set up, by the full active membership, to carry out?
It's simple to understand, the usergroup are there to look at the situation, listen to the members, and progress from there.
As a result of the demands made by some that was the outcome and members all had a chance to have their say about who represented them.
The Usergroup Section is at http://forum.caithness.org/forumdisplay.php?f=79 and exactly what they are doing and what suggestions are being made is contained there, as is the contributions of Admin and others.
If you look in the place indicated either all your questions will be answered or you will be able to voice them there on some of the Threads.
That is why it was set up, as requested, in the way it is.
To answer your other question, yes I was happy with the way it was run from the beginning. I have fallen foul of the Rules and been punished far more severely and for far smaller infractions than some have got away with recently.
I took my punishment, I did not complain or cry on the Forums to others, like a baby, that it wasn't fair. I knew the rules, I pushed my luck and suffered the consequences.
I am not the only one who did that and I am not complaining or seeking sympathy.
You know the rules, you break them, you get punished. If you don't like it, Don't Break the Rules, it's as simple as that in my mind.
The Mods were set up because the Board has grown and grown. Admin, as far as I am aware, were spending more and more time trying to deal with the rule breakers to the detriment of the reat, and by far the larger and more important part of the Org. They had a choice, close the Boards or get some help.
As a result, they got help. They didn't need to they could have just closed the Boards down and concentrated on what the site was created for, thus was just a side line for the benefit of those wishing to chat about Caithness.
With the resultant constant sniping and complaining and with the pressures it must have given them I am surprised they didn't just "pull the plug" and say "A curse on all your Houses", I know I would have done.
But then again, that is exactly what some people have been wishing for so people would have to go elsewhere and in truth, I suspect that is still the aim of some.
"They won't let me play with that Toy so I'm going to Smash it so nobody can have it."
The vast majority of the membership were perfectly happy with the way the Org was run both originally and of late as shown by the fact that only a very small number took part in the poll.
That alone shows that there was not, and indeed is not, much wrong with the Org. A few corrections need to be made and that is in the process of being done.
I don't know about it being "cold" now but I have noticed a distinct reduction in the availability of wooden spoons of late.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.