PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[Bio-Rupp]

Well nobody wants to get burned...and I don't think Menace meant to burn anyone. Just a victim of a poorly executed op.

[PovertyRow]

The consolidation of any power, perceived or real, down to a select few is ludicrous.

 

"You don't have to go to college. Is this Russia Danny?"

 

+1

 

Not to mention, the people who would be the absolute best choices for "council" members are those who would never take the position. And I'd probably be leery of those people who would lobby for themselves to get the position. It was said earlier, and it bears repeating because it would be true, the vote for who would be in the group would simply turn into a popularity contest. A few undeserving candidates would get in, and the whole thing would turn into a farce.

 

And for those complaining that the polls simply turn into the "pitchfork and torches mob" where members simply vote one way or the other do to the mob mentality, the answer is simple. Polls can be set up so that the results can't be seen until the time limit of the poll expires. Do the polls this way, and nobody will know where the vote stands until the time for the poll is finished. This seems like a better idea than the "public" voting idea, which would simply turn into a flame-war gone wild.

 

+ 2

 

I REALLY like the idea of keeping a poll secret until a set time, so folks don't lean towards a trend. I don't think I've seen an HOS poll done that way before.

 

+3 (or whatever increment we are on). It is a simple (obvious now that it has been expressed) idea with no downside I can see.

[N/A]

I can tell you that it is already moving in that direction. (thumbs u

 

I was communicating with a great facilitator today who told me they would only be accepting submissions from a select few. Menace himself had already started moving in that direction. I don't keep tabs on the number of opps in the SS forum but I would bet the number of people offering opps is diminishing. Eventually that will lead to less opps and more $$.

 

Personally I have a list that I take subs from and mail subs to. I don't see the point in extending beyond that group.

[Speedy-D]

I didn't read all of the details on the menace op or really follow it that closely & I didn't vote.

I don't think most of us know how the signature opportunities really work...I don't.

I read there to look at sketches & drama but I rarely post.

 

The little bit that I know about the process tells me that this recent rush to justice is likely to reduce the number of people who are willing to handle these "public" opportunities and take submissions from people they don't already know. When the bar is set low for this type of backlash from a majority of people voting here how can that not make facilitators more cautious about who they do business with?

 

When I first signed up here I "found" the sig forum & thought it was cool that I could communicate through these boards to get one of my personal books signed, sketched & slabbed by a favourite writer/artist...I avoided yellow fever though

 

It would be a shame if the public opportunities become less available because of this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

On the flip side, there's a lot of work involved in handling an opp, and as the handler you have to be willing to stay on top of it from start to finish. The hardest part is that you're at the mercy of someone (the artist) over whom you have very little control. You work super hard to set up a nice opp for everyone, collect tons of money up front, and then...wait for the artist to do his/her part. If they get another gig or are just slow, sometimes you can't do anything about it. When that happens, communication is key; it's a lifesaver. Check in with the artist frequently, and check in with your customers as well. Send out frequent updates, even if it's only to say "Hey, I haven't forgotten you, but there's no news. Keep the faith!"

 

As the middleman, that's a huge part of what the job is. If you can't keep up with it, there's gonna be a lot of heartache all around: customers will feel cheated, you'll feel abused, and artists will feel like they're getting a bad name.

[comix4fun]

As much as I am critical of Menace's handling of communication and fulfillment of duties in all the matters that came to light, I can't help but feel that adding him to a list of people who are actual thieves is an error that, in retrospect, will be the moment when this type of list "jumped the shark" into irrelevance, sadly.

[Speedy-D]

As much as I am critical of Menace's handling of communication and fulfillment of duties in all the matters that came to light, I can't help but feel that adding him to a list of people who are actual thieves is an error that, in retrospect, will be the moment when this type of list "jumped the shark" into irrelevance, sadly.

Yeah, I think you might be right. I wish we could quietly take him off the list. It diminishes what some of the others did, having him up there.

[crassus]

The consolidation of any power, perceived or real, down to a select few is ludicrous.

 

"You don't have to go to college. Is this Russia Danny?"

 

+1

 

Not to mention, the people who would be the absolute best choices for "council" members are those who would never take the position. And I'd probably be leery of those people who would lobby for themselves to get the position. It was said earlier, and it bears repeating because it would be true, the vote for who would be in the group would simply turn into a popularity contest. A few undeserving candidates would get in, and the whole thing would turn into a farce.

 

And for those complaining that the polls simply turn into the "pitchfork and torches mob" where members simply vote one way or the other do to the mob mentality, the answer is simple. Polls can be set up so that the results can't be seen until the time limit of the poll expires. Do the polls this way, and nobody will know where the vote stands until the time for the poll is finished. This seems like a better idea than the "public" voting idea, which would simply turn into a flame-war gone wild.

 

+ 2

 

I REALLY like the idea of keeping a poll secret until a set time, so folks don't lean towards a trend. I don't think I've seen an HOS poll done that way before.

 

+3 (or whatever increment we are on). It is a simple (obvious now that it has been expressed) idea with no downside I can see.

 

Let me say first that I agree, of the two options a blind poll is the simplest solution as it requires no elaborate rule changes and is technically easy. It will indeed have some good effect slowing down a mob mentality.

 

That said there is always a downside in allowing people to pass judgment on a person and remain hidden in doing so. There is no virtue in this. The HoS is condemning a person, its not like voting out a public official. I don't see why, if one really truly believes a person should be condemned, they cannot have the courage of their convictions and say so in public.

[Bosco685]

As much as I am critical of Menace's handling of communication and fulfillment of duties in all the matters that came to light, I can't help but feel that adding him to a list of people who are actual thieves is an error that, in retrospect, will be the moment when this type of list "jumped the shark" into irrelevance, sadly.

Yeah, I think you might be right. I wish we could quietly take him off the list. It diminishes what some of the others did, having him up there.

 

I didn't vote because I was not completely clear on the situation leading to a HOS recommendation. Is there a link that best points to a quick summary?

 

It seemed to be more about extended delays in service fulfillment. But I could be wrong.

[Speedy-D]

The consolidation of any power, perceived or real, down to a select few is ludicrous.

 

"You don't have to go to college. Is this Russia Danny?"

 

+1

 

Not to mention, the people who would be the absolute best choices for "council" members are those who would never take the position. And I'd probably be leery of those people who would lobby for themselves to get the position. It was said earlier, and it bears repeating because it would be true, the vote for who would be in the group would simply turn into a popularity contest. A few undeserving candidates would get in, and the whole thing would turn into a farce.

 

And for those complaining that the polls simply turn into the "pitchfork and torches mob" where members simply vote one way or the other do to the mob mentality, the answer is simple. Polls can be set up so that the results can't be seen until the time limit of the poll expires. Do the polls this way, and nobody will know where the vote stands until the time for the poll is finished. This seems like a better idea than the "public" voting idea, which would simply turn into a flame-war gone wild.

 

+ 2

 

I REALLY like the idea of keeping a poll secret until a set time, so folks don't lean towards a trend. I don't think I've seen an HOS poll done that way before.

 

+3 (or whatever increment we are on). It is a simple (obvious now that it has been expressed) idea with no downside I can see.

 

Let me say first that I agree, of the two options a blind poll is the simplest solution as it requires no elaborate rule changes and is technically easy. It will indeed have some good effect slowing down a mob mentality.

 

That said there is always a downside in allowing people to pass judgment on a person and remain hidden in doing so. There is no virtue in this. The HoS is condemning a person, its not like voting out a public official. I don't see why, if one really truly believes a person should be condemned, they cannot have the courage of their convictions and say so in public.

The polls we have now are just as anonymous as what's being proposed. The only difference is that the results won't be visible until the poll is ended. :shrug:

[crassus]

The consolidation of any power, perceived or real, down to a select few is ludicrous.

 

"You don't have to go to college. Is this Russia Danny?"

 

+1

 

Not to mention, the people who would be the absolute best choices for "council" members are those who would never take the position. And I'd probably be leery of those people who would lobby for themselves to get the position. It was said earlier, and it bears repeating because it would be true, the vote for who would be in the group would simply turn into a popularity contest. A few undeserving candidates would get in, and the whole thing would turn into a farce.

 

And for those complaining that the polls simply turn into the "pitchfork and torches mob" where members simply vote one way or the other do to the mob mentality, the answer is simple. Polls can be set up so that the results can't be seen until the time limit of the poll expires. Do the polls this way, and nobody will know where the vote stands until the time for the poll is finished. This seems like a better idea than the "public" voting idea, which would simply turn into a flame-war gone wild.

 

+ 2

 

I REALLY like the idea of keeping a poll secret until a set time, so folks don't lean towards a trend. I don't think I've seen an HOS poll done that way before.

 

+3 (or whatever increment we are on). It is a simple (obvious now that it has been expressed) idea with no downside I can see.

 

Let me say first that I agree, of the two options a blind poll is the simplest solution as it requires no elaborate rule changes and is technically easy. It will indeed have some good effect slowing down a mob mentality.

 

That said there is always a downside in allowing people to pass judgment on a person and remain hidden in doing so. There is no virtue in this. The HoS is condemning a person, its not like voting out a public official. I don't see why, if one really truly believes a person should be condemned, they cannot have the courage of their convictions and say so in public.

The polls we have now are just as anonymous as what's being proposed. The only difference is that the results won't be visible until the poll is ended. :shrug:

 

Yes and that is my problem, I think anonymity is one of the weaknesses of this method. Its a lot tougher to do something when you have to stand out and be seen doing it, and the HoS should be tougher to do.

[Bio-Rupp]

It really wouldn't be that hard to keep up with public voting.

 

If everyone keeps quoting a "yay" or "nay"... all different boardies will be recorded and a count could be easier to obtain.

 

YAY

 

YAY

 

YAY

 

YAY

 

YAY

 

NAY

 

NAY

 

NAY

 

NAY

 

NAY

[Bosco685]

SAY

 

SAY

 

SAY

 

SAY

 

SAY

 

HEY

 

HEY

 

HEY

 

HEY

 

HEY

[Speedy-D]

It really wouldn't be that hard to keep up with public voting.

 

If everyone keeps quoting a "yay" or "nay"... all different boardies will be recorded and a count could be easier to obtain.

 

YAY

 

YAY

 

YAY

 

YAY

 

YAY

 

NAY

 

NAY

 

NAY

 

NAY

 

NAY

Rupp's secret vision for the Boards is revealed at last!!

[slym2none]

I don't like the idea of quoting the past post, as some people might get disingenuous and change someone's post. It could be easily caught but still... why give anyone a chance?

 

 

 

-slym

[Bio-Rupp]

Well I figured only "yay"s would be quoted with no "nay's... and vice versa.

 

If you are going to "yay"... you wouldn't quote the "nay" quote.

[Speedy-D]

I don't like the idea of quoting the past post, as some people might get disingenuous and change someone's post SPEEDY-D IS BRILLIANT. It could be easily caught but still... why give anyone a chance SPEEDY-D IS BRILLIANT?

 

 

 

-slym

Dude, have a little faith. That won't happen.

[seanfingh]

Voting ended today. Menace is in the HOS.

 

compostable_fertilizer.

[joecgcmaniac]

I don't like the idea of quoting the past post, as some people might get disingenuous and change someone's post SPEEDY-D IS . It could be easily caught but still... why give anyone a chance SPEEDY-D IS ?

 

 

 

-slym

Dude, have a little faith. That won't happen.

 

+1

[bababooey]

As much as I am critical of Menace's handling of communication and fulfillment of duties in all the matters that came to light, I can't help but feel that adding him to a list of people who are actual thieves is an error that, in retrospect, will be the moment when this type of list "jumped the shark" into irrelevance, sadly.

I wish we could quietly take him off the list. It diminishes what some of the others did, having him up there.

I'm all for not HOS'ing people who aren't "actual thieves"....in fact I pointed that out yesterday.

 

While I agree with you both on menace, rather than making more rash changes perhaps the floor should be given to those who feel he is worthy of the HOS.

 

While I think the accountability of a publicly disclosed vote is worth considering; anonymous polls still have some merit. We can't brush off the result because 8 people posting here all agree.

 

On the anonymous vs. public vote, I don't know what impact hiding results (in the anonymous polls) will have - the problem is we let threads spin into baiting & personal attacks to make the accused meltdown while warding off those who would dare speak on behalf of those presumed guilty.

 

I give -slym credit in the solarcadet thing, he clearly disliked solar but asked for feedback from those voting the other way, he was respectful when those opinions were shared.

 

Edited December 22, 2013 by bababooey

[crassus]

I don't like the idea of quoting the past post, as some people might get disingenuous and change someone's post. It could be easily caught but still... why give anyone a chance?

 

 

 

-slym

 

I'll be the first to admit that public voting, which I feel personally is more just, is going to suffer from technical problems. Even if there is a separate thread, one vote one post for each member voting, it still leaves open big questions:

 

As of now a poll is 2 weeks. Will a separate thread be "open" for 2 weeks for members to post their vote? If so does that mean a member can go back after voting and delete or change (edit) their vote anytime before the 2 weeks is up? The public vote idea cannot be a single event like a vote in a council room or something. I admit this may be a fatal complication to the idea.

 

The blind poll at least is technically simple, you vote once that is it, you are done.