.Orger Usergroup for Change

[Colin Manson]

Hi,

I'm just starting this thing, after this it'll be porshiepoo that leads the group.

Users that wish to be included in this group can post here, the purpose of the group isn't yet clearly defined, that will be decided at the first meeting.

Some initial ideas that were voiced in the chat room gathering were -

Terms & Conditions and Forum Rules - They need to be revised, certainly they need to be clearer.

New Moderators - Suggested by the Users via the usergroup

Moderators - Code of conduct, moderating policy, rotation system?


In essence we would like to get two groups together to work out how and what to improve and to implement a system to create the required change.

I'd suggest about 12 members for the group but that's up to you, it needs to be manageable and hopefully contain a broad spectrum of users.

porshiepoo will choose the group from all the applicants. There is nothing to stop you creating a second group concentrate on certain aspects of the plan and then report back to the first group.

Once the group has been formed we'll arrange to meet to find out what the scope of the project will be and we can start to work on what everyone thinks is the highest priority.

[Mr P Cannop]

would like to join the group please

[Ricco]

Over the weekend I have been thinking that there should be a mixed approach to the appointment of moderators: some elected from within the admin group and some elected by the orgers themselves - perhaps a balanced number?

If it were left entirely to the orgers to elect mods there is the danger that a clique of 'interested' parties could get a majority. A mixed approach would tend to be more self-moderating as the interests of both sides would be represented.

I also think that the role of the moderators needs to be more clearly defined and made public so that there can be no doubts amongst the org community. I trust that representations and elections will be wise and that those elected will carry out their duties responsibly.

As for the forum in its entirety.. I think that it is fine, just needs to be more open so that the general membership can see and understand why certain events take place.

[porshiepoo]

I'm just starting this thing, after this it'll be porshiepoo that leads the group.

Huh? When did that get decided then??????
I've just come on here (logged on all the time though as I'm lazy lol) and found out i've been elected to lead this group.
Again, Huh?

[porshiepoo]

Ok Guys, lets start by posting names - come on you know you want to.

Mr P Cannop your request has been noted.

[Bill Fernie]

If we are having names put forward will you consider using real names this time round. A few of us have been up front from the start and it might help users confidence in the set up if they knew precisely who was doing the moderating.

If there are to be elections are you going to have each potential candidate do write up about their experience and views on the web site and forum. It is difficult for anyone to decide in an election who to vote for and there has been criticism for example of the recent community council elections in Caithness because no information was put out about candidates and people were left to vote for people they knew or take stab in the dark.

Can I suggest that candidates require a few skills and a very thick skin, ability to take lots of criticism, time to deal with an increased number of PM's and emails on any topic ongoing on the forum and from time to time the ability to eat humble pie- as you will never get it right all of the time. Once selected new moderators will need to catch up in the moderators forum with all of the previous threads, deal with the rules old and new.

I am not sure if the new set up will work as the more people you introduce into the set up the more potential there is for disagreement on the style and approach to any particular problem or issue. Running anything by committee can take a lot of time (I should know) and rarely do you have a 100% concensus or anything approaching it. That is fine if eveyone understands the set up and does not feel hurt when votes go against them if indeed a vote is required. To date the mods have generally agreed on most issues and for the most part things have been resolved very quickly.

Since the buck stops with me and it is myself who receive some of the final threats in some matters including legal action I will still reserve as in the past the right to overall control where I feel that particular matters may directly affect me as owner. That said I think this might be an interesting approach on the web site at the start of something new at least to us.

I stand ready for a few comments on the above - in fact I expect nothing less from you. Nothing is set in stone.

[porshiepoo]

The electing sounds good to me.
How about we start a new thread whereby potential candidates can post a write up about themselves (if thats the way people want to go), but shouldn't really be open to replies. Purely for candidate write up?
Then after a set time perhaps we put it to a poll? The candidates with most votes get picked??

Or would this leave us open to people picking friends, family etc rather than the right person for the job???

I think candidates really have to be aware of the time involved in this. It seems to me that since the moderators were chosen, those moderators don't seem to post as much as they used to. I guess this is due to the amount of time needed to moderate not leaving much time for posting.
Also I think we expect mods to be unbiased (even though thats not necessarily job description) and can sometimes be expected not to even have an opinion.
Just something to be aware of. Could those of you intending to put yourselves forward be capable of being unbiased if necessary???

[calish6]

Hi there, I don't post on the '.org' all that much, but I do read a lot of the threads with interest.
I rarely reply to any, unless something that is being said gets on my goat, but the majority of the time (99%) the Orgers moderate themselves and I believe the likes of 'porshiepoo' would do a grand job as being leader of this new group.

The fiasco of the last few days could of been prevented if the Mods or mod in question, were more open about what happened right from the start.
I totally understood the orgers and their grievances, but when the whole story started to filter through (slowly I might add) I could see the reasoning behind the moderators action, so did not feel the need to throw my tuppennys worth in. Some people do though and unfortunately the thread gets spoiled and goes off track, and tempers flare. If things like that were nipped in the bud, we could go back to slagging of the government and the likes a lot sooner and there wouldn't be so many battered ego's.

I am not saying that I would be a good Moderator, far from it, but when you vote for your new mods, don't rush into nominating, take a look back over their posts and get a feel for the type of person they are, see how objective they are, see if they rise to the bait too quickly and as Bill said, get them to use their real name.
At the end of the day, honesty is the best policy, and work as a team.

Thats enough of my ramblings, just vote wisely.

[Dreadnought]

May I suggest the User Group is comprised only of Caithnessians? The Org was set up to promote Caithness to the benefit of Caithness people, it is only right that people in Caithness make up the User Group.

[Gogglebox]

May I suggest the User Group is comprised only of Caithnessians? The Org was set up to promote Caithness to the benefit of Caithness people, it is only right that people in Caithness make up the User Group.

Wouldnt that be encouraging exclusivity, we need to expand our horizons not become all parochial.

I feel it should be open to all members of the org, i dont think we have used location as a excluding factor before and would be wrong to start now

Id be intrested in getting involved, i now nothing technically about computers but i dont think thats whats needed to help shape the new setup, plenty of time on my hands and interested in seeing the org go forward from the current situation and encouraging some of the ex-orgers to be unable to resist coming back to join good strong debate.

Any more out there willing to get involved

[weeboyagee]

I'm up for being considered for the group - after the festive season I won't be doing much - aye right!

WBG

[Piglet]

I feel it should be open to all members of the org, i dont think we have used location as a excluding factor before and would be wrong to start now

I have to agree with you Gogglebox it has to be open to all .org members even those that don't post that often.

[calish6]

I do think that you would find that most people on the org are either living in Caithness or are ex-pats or have very strong Caithness connections, but yes, it should be open to anybody who has good judgment and common sense.
I don't think any of the orgers would vote for anybody form Kazikstan anyway, unless they had connections !! lol :-)

[porshiepoo]

Personally I too feel that it should be open to everyone that uses the forum.


I'd like to see it open to everyone who has an interest in how it is run and how it works and who genuinely want to move it forward and encourage those ex orgers back.

[porshiepoo]

I meant to ask how you all felt about the suggestion of using real names?

[Ricco]

I would be up for a place if I were considered a valuable contributor. I have no real objection to my real name being know as long as other personal details were kept that way. A number of members already know my real name anyway. Go for it, Porshie!

[calish6]

Yip, at least first names would be a start, but you need to be careful.
I don't think being too open is right, you could be stopped in the street every 5 minutes by disgruntled orgers wanting you to fix their problems.
But I could be wrong.

Best to put it to a vote (poll).

[krieve]

Would that be your whole name or a real made up name like jimbob sorry and are you OK with being lynched when you go out shopping!!!

[Ricco]

Yip, at least first names would be a start, but you need to be careful.
I don't think being too open is right, you could be stopped in the street every 5 minutes by disgruntled orgers wanting you to fix their problems.
But I could be wrong.

Best to put it to a vote (poll).

Hmm, they'd have to travel a long way. Anyway, it is good to be approachable and helpful.

Would that be your whole name or a real made up name like jimbob sorry and are you OK with being lynched when you go out shopping!!!

Wouldn't that be the same as 'Ricco' or 'Krieve'? I'd rather stick with the open & honest approach.

[MadPict]

I have asked for clarification on this - I assume (always a dangerous thing) that your real names would only be revealed to Bill et al.