View Full Version : Usergroup
j4bberw0ck
04-Mar-07, 13:36
Like all those other than The Few, I can't post in that thread. Fine with that, I didn't volunteer; I don't go in that thread often, either. But I think it's reasonable to have a view, and I hope no one will mind my posting a response here instead.
I just read the horrendous overblown mishmash of proposed rules (http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?p=192920#post192920) and the points system for infractions. I say horrendous, because the suggestions are so complex and so based on individual Moderator's interpretations that if that rule set goes through my guess is it'll (a) need a full time official to issue rulings, and (b) make Mods lives more difficult, and cause a civil war between Mods and Orgers, as people spilt hairs over what's proper and what's not.
This is a BB, not a legislative chamber. The majority don't cause problems. The minority who do need simple rules.
All credit to Oddquine for putting in what looks to be the lion's share of the work in the usergroup, but a step backwards for a longer perspective might be overdue. Personally, I like the "3 strikes and you're out" plan. Mods' rulings final, if you don't like it you can always go find somewhere else.
Like all those other than The Few, I can't post in that thread. Fine with that, I didn't volunteer; I don't go in that thread often, either. But I think it's reasonable to have a view, and I hope no one will mind my posting a response here instead.
I just read the horrendous overblown mishmash of proposed rules (http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?p=192920#post192920) and the points system for infractions. I say horrendous, because the suggestions are so complex and so based on individual Moderator's interpretations that if that rule set goes through my guess is it'll (a) need a full time official to issue rulings, and (b) make Mods lives more difficult, and cause a civil war between Mods and Orgers, as people spilt hairs over what's proper and what's not.
This is a BB, not a legislative chamber. The majority don't cause problems. The minority who do need simple rules.
All credit to Oddquine for putting in what looks to be the lion's share of the work in the usergroup, but a step backwards for a longer perspective might be overdue. Personally, I like the "3 strikes and you're out" plan. Mods' rulings final, if you don't like it you can always go find somewhere else.
They're not proposed rules............they are suggestions for discussion..as are the infraction points allocations. :roll:
I don't have a problem with three strikes and you are out......but what constitutes a strike?
I had a suggestion that it should be on the lines of employment law.........first written warning (initial PM?), second written warning (3 points), third written warning (3 points), dismissal (4 points and suspension..........first time shortish, second time longer........then a third suspension would be permanent...........while gross misconduct would be immediate permanent suspension.)
The bits in brackets are mine, btw. Thoughts?
j4bberw0ck
04-Mar-07, 17:23
They're not proposed rules............they are suggestions for discussion..as are the infraction points allocations. :roll:
Not sure why the rolling eyeballs.... it wasn't me that wrote all that stuff and yet managed not to make the point!
I don't have a problem with three strikes and you are out......but what constitutes a strike?The only thing possible; moderator's opinion based on a set of guidelines for moderators, as opposed to what starts to look like a massive exercise in bureaucracy and record-keeping around a book of rules for forum users.
I had a suggestion that it should be on the lines of employment law.........first written warning (initial PM?), second written warning (3 points), third written warning (3 points), dismissal (4 points and suspension..........first time shortish, second time longer........then a third suspension would be permanent...........while gross misconduct would be immediate permanent suspension.) Overcomplicated, if you'll excuse my saying so. Gordon Brown with his addiction to complexity would love it; and like Gordon Brown's complexity, it'd lead to constant changes and tinkering and argument.
Moderators should be just that. Moderators. And if they don't like making tough calls based on discretion, they shouldn't be moderators. Rule books are great to hide behind but the more rules, the more exceptions and variances.
Hope this helps. (Well, you did ask!)
should this thread not be deleted??
Myself and Billy Boy were not allowed to post threads on the user group.
I hope it's the same rules apply to all here..
Is this not going over the same old ground all over again?
j4bberw0ck
04-Mar-07, 20:32
Myself and Billy Boy were not allowed to post threads on the user group.
Nor was I. That's why I started this one.
I meant that we were not allowed to post threads in this forum regarding the user group. None of us can post in the user group section.
I just read the horrendous overblown mishmash of proposed rules (http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?p=192920#post192920) and the points system for infractions. I say horrendous, because the suggestions are so complex and so based on individual Moderator's interpretations that if that rule set goes through my guess is it'll (a) need a full time official to issue rulings, and (b) make Mods lives more difficult, and cause a civil war between Mods and Orgers, as people spilt hairs over what's proper and what's not.
As the producer of much of the above.............I give up.........and I'm off the usergroup.
I do appreciate all the remarks from the users........it has helped me come to a decision.
porshiepoo
04-Mar-07, 22:33
Looks like we have discord in the camps. Toys are out of prams and dummies well and truly on the floor.
Such a shame! The usergroup should have gotten off to a flying start but I think the only member putting real time in was Oddquine. I guess Oddquine has finally given up the battle and decided her time is better spent elsewhere.
I stand accused of not putting as much time into the group as I should have but I tried to explain this in my thread 'confused'. It would seem this thread has now seen the resignation of Oddquine which is not the reaction intended.
I stupidly thought that by trying to explain that the amount of threads in the usergroup section were causing me confusion that we could try to maybe keep each seperate topic in it's own thread. i.e Infractions in one, rules in another and so on and so forth. Of course I'm not saying that this is the way round it but just a suggestion.
Is it just me that found the usergroup threads disjointed? Get the gyst of one topic (i.e infractions) just to find that it's being re-discussed elsewhere too? How are we supposed to have a functional conversation and come up with any decisions on any topic if we're all having separate conversations in various seperate threads but on the same topic in the usergroup section? Just doesn't make sense to me.
j4bberw0ck
05-Mar-07, 01:29
Well, I'm sorry Oddquine has decided to quit.
Perhaps if some one had had the sense to make the Usergroup forums public - or provide a public platform - it wouldn't have happened.
The_man_from_del_monte
05-Mar-07, 01:36
Like all those other than The Few, I can't post in that thread.
Why would you want to? Big fish / small pond posting is fine for those who think they're something special..... those of us who know we're special don't need to swim in small pools ;)
I have just come across this thread and am dismayed that we still have a minority who cannot resist any opportunity to take a pop at those who try to do good for the many. I think that all of those who have been sitting on their butts and whinging away should go right back and read the entire beginning and content of all the threads to do with the user group - perhaps they will then glean the true purpose of this group.
I think they should also immediately apologise to Oddquine (who has done so much hard and valuable work on this) and the other members of the user group for slighting them and slagging off the work that they have been doing.
Or... perhaps they aren't that brave??:mad:
j4bberw0ck
05-Mar-07, 10:52
Ricco, I've just responded to your pm and now I find you scolding me in here too. Do give over...... Oddquine has shown herself more than able to dish it out as well as take it and I don't imagine she needs you to defend her.
If the usergroup had been collectively doing what is was supposed to be doing, and if others had matched her work-rate, then perhaps her evident frustration wouldn't have boiled over. Mind you, she did have time on her hands that perhaps others didn't.
If forum users had been consulted by the usergroup - perhaps by polls - instead of the usergroup installing itself in an ivory tower and decreeing what shall be appropriate for the plebs, then perhaps this situation wouldn't have arisen.
If Oddquine has become so frustrated by the whole thing she's decided she wants out, then the usergroup concept - or the execution of the concept - has failed.
Since Oddquine volunteered for the role, simply "being nice" and agreeing in an effort to keep her on board, and accepting without question her ideas in order to show how nice you are, is two-faced, to say the least of it. Do you feel you need the approval?
Valerie Campbell
05-Mar-07, 13:35
The Usergroup topic seems to pop up so frequently on the Org maybe we should re-name it!
In the User Group section, contributions from the members has been as follows:
crashbandicoot 4 posts
Elenna - 0 posts
gogglebox - 39 posts
icebox - 0 posts
Mr P Cannop - 6 posts last one pre 05/01/2007
Oddquinne - 69 posts
porshiepoo - 20 posts
rheghead - 4 posts
ricco - 9 posts
rockchick - 2 posts
weeboyagee - 10 posts
weeburd - 23 posts
Thats 2 members with ZERO contributions (why did they volunteer if they had nothing to offer?), a further 6 members with 10 posts or less, and the remaining 4 doing the rest. Some user group eh!!
I feel sorry for the ones like OQ who made the effort.
You remind me of a chap who complained about dog mess along a certain road stetch of road during the Foot and Mouth crisis and went to the trouble of counting up each dollap to prove a point.
Do I?
I ain't trying to prove anything, and I don't give a flying monkeys what happens to the user group or the Org. Just an observation that not all have pulled their weight.
Am I wrong Rheghead?
How do you account for pms that I have got that explicitly mention that YOU are just waiting to for the Usergroup to mess up or fail then?
If Oddquine has become so frustrated by the whole thing she's decided she wants out, then the usergroup concept - or the execution of the concept - has failed.
Since Oddquine volunteered for the role, simply "being nice" and agreeing in an effort to keep her on board, and accepting without question her ideas in order to show how nice you are, is two-faced, to say the least of it. Do you feel you need the approval?
Look, J4bberw0ck, you seem to have a weird idea of what the usergroup is all about.
I am not frustrated that much by the lack of input by the usergroup, because I'm inclined to think that if they violently disagree with something, they would say so....but it would have been useful if they had posted the odd "I agree" if only to stop threads like this.
My ideas were simply that..........ideas..........to be discussed..........and to be read by admin to see if there was anything useful............it's called consultation..............and you could so easily have had your input by PMing one or all of us.
But I have come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter what happens re clarification of the rules etc, people who like to whine, will whine anyway.
So it isn't the lack of input by the usergroup which has brought me to my decision................it is the whingers who didn't bother to stand for the usergroup......but rather than PM us with ideas for suggesting on the usergroup forum, start threads like this...........time and again.
I know now how admin and the mods have felt...............and how a few here try to make them feel that way..................perhaps the answer is to be more picky as to who is allowed membership. :roll:
I ain't trying to prove anything, and I don't give a flying monkeys what happens to the user group or the Org. Just an observation that not all have pulled their weight.
Dozer, if you aren't trying to prove anything, or actually don't care, then why do you keep taking pot shots at people who, in your opinion, have not "pulled their weight"? Thats make it sound like each Usergroup member was assigned a specific amount or quota of work, and they haven't met production targets, so get out the whip! :lol:
You keep bringing this up, and yet there has already previously been at least two very good explanations...one from Niall and one from Weeboyagee...of why some members of the Usergroup may not have posted as much as others. So just who is it that it appears keeps going over old ground?
The gist of the threads you and BillyBoy started about the Usergroup were simply "What do we need them for for, they aren't doing anything!", and while
there was some reasonable discussion in them, in places, the bulk of it was pretty much bad-tempered griping that the Usergroup hadn't managed to wave a magic wand and instantly give everyone X, Y, and Z...though what those actually Are, none of the posters ever made clear.
To give Jabberwock credit, he has started a thread because he wished to give thoughts on a topic that has been/is under Usergroup discussion, (ie, the infraction system) which is rather different than posting a moan because you are of the opinion that the group isn't doing anything, and sniping at the members. I actually don't know what the Admin position on discussing that on the General Forum is, Jabberwock, so there possibly might need to be clarification about that later today. It might have been better if you PM'd a Group member, who could post them for you to the relevent discussion.
Now I don't feel I have to justify myself to anyone, but because my name has been brought up at least twice, and because Org members may be genuinely wondering, I will relate as to why I have not taken the active role on the Usergroup that I originally intended. I truly do apologise if any Usergroup or General members have been disappointed that I have not appeared to have done a whole lot (I would argue that taking time to carefully study what was the already existing forum set-up, and then closely following the discussions on various topics in order to be able to raise points someone else might miss, or otherwise contribute shound it be rtequired, actually is very active participation) however, as much as I enjoy this forum, my family comes first. That is how it should be, and that is how it always will be.
Briefly, the week after it was formed...just as everyone was beginning to get to grips with reviewing the T&Cs, Rules, etc, and some discussions initiated...which was also the week running up to Christmas, we had a family member (in Ayrshire) pass away very tragically and unexpectedly. Dealing with that, we limped through Christmas with our children here, only to be hit with two further family crises (which it is not appropriate to relate here) between then and the end of the first week in January, after which time, I was really ill (all the stress likely contributing).
By the time I got back to even being concerned with online matters, toward the end of the month, and caught up what had been happening in the time I had been gone, there was a certain amount of progress being made on several Usergroup topics, all of which I found quite reasonable and had nothing I could add. Since that time, where there have been two or three members taking part in a discussion topic, there has always been one of them expressing the same point or idea which I would have wished to contribute, so other than posting to agree, there was little point me sticking my oar in. It would have simply been a ponitless distraction to have kept popping up here and there to say "Yes, I agree with that bit, and that, and that!"
I had been hoping that by this time there would have been contributions from the general members...either new ideas, or people like Jabberwock wishing to add their thoughts to a topic already being discussed. I have yet to have any PMs from anyone giving me views that they wanted added, or points to raise. And quite honestly, from the number of people who have been so adamant all along about there needing to be changes, there has been a serious lack of suggestions of exactly what it is they want the changes to be!
So now it seems like some people are really wanting to force the issue, and the Usergroup is going to take the hit no matter what happens...if it continues on, there will be further carryings on about the job they are/are not doing, and if they disband, there will be a lot of sneering and "I told you so's". Very sad attitude, really. And a real shame not to do the opposite instead, in public commendation for the progress the Group has already made. Yes, I would agree Oddquine has done the lions share, being especially visible with posting ideas, and a few others another large, and similar, chunk...they surely deserve congratulations adn respect for that! However, that doesn't mean all the members have not been there, doing their best when and how they could. Don't put them down for that. They were all volunteers, and sometimes life doesn't go along the way you thought it would be.
But I have come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter what happens re clarification of the rules etc, people who like to whine, will whine anyway. :roll:
Yes, it very certainly seems like it.
j4bberw0ck
05-Mar-07, 16:37
perhaps the answer is to be more picky as to who is allowed membership. :roll:
:lol: You obviously like, and feel comfortable with, rules, regulations and controls. Lots of them!
If I should have pm'd, you have my apologies. It wasn't at all obvious to me that that was the approved course of action.
If I shouldn't have posted in the public forum, you have my apologies. It wasn't at all obvious to me that I wasn't supposed to do that and not having been able to post in the usergroup thread, I saw little alternative.
I certainly don't consider what I did or said to be "whining". I don't do "whining". Neither do I pick up my football and go home the first time I get tackled.
j4bberw0ck
05-Mar-07, 16:52
Elenna, just saw your post when I posted mine. Reading......
:lol: You obviously like, and feel comfortable with, rules, regulations and controls. Lots of them!
Nope, I don't particularly like a lot of rules, but I do think that those which exist and the consequences of breaking them should be clear and transparent.
If you had bothered to read the threads, you'd have found that there were no suggested rules added at all.........therefore no new infractions added either.
If I should have pm'd, you have my apologies. It wasn't at all obvious to me that that was the approved course of action.
If I shouldn't have posted in the public forum, you have my apologies. It wasn't at all obvious to me that I wasn't supposed to do that and not having been able to post in the usergroup thread, I saw little alternative.
Not necessarily the approved one.............but certainly one which has been suggested time and again, rather than starting threads which appear to be replacing the "why has so and so been suspended" ones.
You can read the Usergroup Forum, so you could have read the Sticky at the top of it...which was put there for that purpose...or read some of the other usergroup threads on General, where we have said that we welcomed PMs or emails.
I certainly don't consider what I did or said to be "whining". I don't do "whining". Neither do I pick up my football and go home the first time I get tackled.
In your opinion...................just as I don't do picking up my football and going home the first time I get tackled..........even where the tackle is a foul.
I have simply finally got fed up with the carping and have better things to do with my time....and it happened to be your thread that broke this camel's back.
j4bberw0ck
05-Mar-07, 18:32
Oddquine, there are all sorts of things I could have done. I didn't. I don't see why it should be necessary to dig through the minutiae of several months of posts to discover the Officially Approved Manner of Communication with you. As a consultative group it's up to you, the group, to make it clear and to communicate yourselves. That's one of the things you could have done. You didn't.
All very easy with hindsight, isn't it? You've had my apology for posting - now for heaven's sake let's move on.
This will be my last post in this thread come what may.
Oddquine, there are all sorts of things I could have done. I didn't. I don't see why it should be necessary to dig through the minutiae of several months of posts to discover the Officially Approved Manner of Communication with you. As a consultative group it's up to you, the group, to make it clear and to communicate yourselves. That's one of the things you could have done. You didn't.
All very easy with hindsight, isn't it? You've had my apology for posting - now for heaven's sake let's move on.
This will be my last post in this thread come what may.
Of course there was.................you could have read the Rules and Regs and the usergroup posts and got your facts right....or you could have read the memberlist sticky and PMd me with your objections to my suggestions.
As a consultative group, it shouldn't be necessary to keep on saying to PM us.............but we have had to.............hence the sticky............which is a simple click and read....no digging through minutiae required. :roll:
I have to say I'm not surprised at the complaints about infractions if members spend as little time reading the Rules and Regulations as you did the posts on the Usergroup Forum..............where you'd have found the preferred method of contact.
I do like the last word! ;)
Yes, it very certainly seems like it.
Funny though, how Elenna has managed to post on other threads (apart from between 19/12/2006 and till 3 weeks ago) but hasn't contributed to the user group at all.
And yes, I expect this little post will cause a rally of abuse to be hurled back at me.
It's good to know that while you may not like what I write, but it at least stirs you into action!!!
That's 1 up for me - the User Group forum got 0!!
j4bberw0ck
06-Mar-07, 10:20
<sigh> breaking my own undertaking not to post in here again.
If there's a Mod online would you please lock this thread before dozerboy succumbs to temptation again, please? Enough damage has been done and I accept I'm responsible for much of it, though it wasn't what was intended; my beef was with the group's output rather than individuals within it.
I have corresponded a few times to the usergroup through the pm system to Oddquine and have always received a prompt answer and I find that she is a very dedicated .Orger, more power to your keyboard Oddquine, you took on a thankless task by joining the usergroup.
If the individual members realised that the .Org is not run for individuals, then we may have a better web site. The recent figures published by the Admin show that the CWWS is growing and growing.
Well done Bill, Niall & Colin, and the active members of the usergroup
Have any of the ideas put forward by this user group been taken on board by the administration?
Thread closed as per OP request.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.