|
|
| Author |
Message |
slynne
|
|
Grex's non-members.
| 
Nov 20 17:15 UTC 2002 |
Since I dont want to further hijack the nominations item but generally
think this issue is a good one to discuss, I think a new item is in
order.
This is for a discussion of how Grex can show it's appreciation for
members who choose to contribute to the system in a non-financial way.
|
| 73 responses total. |
slynne
|
|
response 1 of 73:
|
Nov 20 17:16 UTC 2002 |
#107 of 122 by The Accidental Purist (other) on Tue Nov 19 15:17:44
2002:
slynne, out of curiosity, how would you have non-financial contributors
valued?
I get the feeling that your position is based on a very subjective
perception of the treatment of a class of "outsiders" within which you
define yourself to be, but in what substantive ways can we change our
organizational proactices to alter that perception?
|
jp2
|
|
response 2 of 73:
|
Nov 20 17:31 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
slynne
|
|
response 3 of 73:
|
Nov 20 17:45 UTC 2002 |
My position may well be a subjective perception. However, others share
it so it isnt just me that has this feeling. It just really bothers me
when there is a discussion about some policy or another and someone
will pretty much say that another person's opinion doesnt hold as much
weight because they arent a member. Whenever anyone says something like
that it bothers me because it ignores the very real contribution to the
system that people make here when they post in bbs. Whenever a person
posts in bbs, they are contributing time to the system in a sense. I
think contributions of posts in bbs are *more* valuable even than
financial donations. I say this because I firmly believe that as long
as the conferences are interesting, the money will be there.
I would like to see people treated as contributors to the system even
if they are not members. It wouldnt hurt if non members could be
allowed to vote for things like certain system policies that effect all
users. That isnt even necessary though if people could simply stop
treating all non members as if they are mooching without adding
something to the system. Most of the non-members who do that dont even
read bbs!
|
other
|
|
response 4 of 73:
|
Nov 20 20:49 UTC 2002 |
Hmm. As I read #3, I started picturing ways in which we could divide up
the administration of Grex between member-only votes, and user votes.
The question that comes to mind is, how do differentiate
(organizationally, for purposes of administration) between casual users,
or user accounts created strictly to affect vote outcomes, and
substantive contributors to the community? If we do it by number of
conference entries, then we risk flooding the conferences with junk just
for the purpose of inflating those numbers. Ideally, a qualitative
measure would be used, but offhand I can't think of how to acquire one.
Do you have any ideas on how to determine what user accounts should have
voting rights for some things, or which parts of system governance could
be effectively achieved by user vote rather than member vote?
|
jp2
|
|
response 5 of 73:
|
Nov 20 21:48 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
slynne
|
|
response 6 of 73:
|
Nov 20 22:15 UTC 2002 |
I would think that using the number of posts in a conference would be
ok. It could always be discontinued if it becomes a problem. Or, it
could be verified users who post some minimum number of posts. *shrug*.
|
slynne
|
|
response 7 of 73:
|
Nov 20 22:19 UTC 2002 |
But to be honest, it really is mostly an attitude thing and I recognize
that the board has no control over the attitude of some of the members.
|
cross
|
|
response 8 of 73:
|
Nov 20 22:39 UTC 2002 |
(Watch out! You might have polytarp voting soon. :-)
|
other
|
|
response 9 of 73:
|
Nov 20 23:04 UTC 2002 |
I think polytarp voting could be a good thing, as long as his vote is not
disproportionately influential. I suspect he would rise to the occasion.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 10 of 73:
|
Nov 21 05:02 UTC 2002 |
Uuhh... "number of posts in a conference" puts me in mind of the "I'm last"
race. :(
|
krj
|
|
response 11 of 73:
|
Nov 21 06:55 UTC 2002 |
Much of what I hear in these threads boils down to:
"You didn't embrace my wonderful ideas for changing Grex!
Waaaa, you are mean to me!" Usually what this means is that
people aren't willing to do the political work involved,
the sort of work that's required to make changes in any
democratic social organization. Quoting from Mary in the other
item:
"On Grex you make your case and rally support. Sometimes you win but most
of the time, to be real, the idea sucks dead rats, as John likes to say.
You admit it, eventually, and start thinking of better ideas. And even if
you persist in seeing your concept as brilliant, you just have to think of
it as being before its time."
I see lots of non-members getting appreciated for stylistic, witty,
or well-written participation in conferences and in party.
I see this constantly.
|
krj
|
|
response 12 of 73:
|
Nov 21 06:56 UTC 2002 |
(In fact I came up with a name for it, when people would talk about
being too poor to afford a Grex membership: "Intellectual sweat equity.")
|
mdw
|
|
response 13 of 73:
|
Nov 21 07:14 UTC 2002 |
I think it's a lot easier to look at an established system and find
fault with it, than it is to look at that same system and improve it. I
think there is also an interesting tradeoff which we haven't really
discussed: how much of what we have here is good and we shouldn't change
it, vs. how much of what we have here is bad, and we should fix it.
|
remmers
|
|
response 14 of 73:
|
Nov 21 13:28 UTC 2002 |
I tend to evaluate people's ideas based on whether the ideas are any
good, not on the basis of whether they're members or not. I think
that's what most people do. There will always be people who feel
differently, and - on a free-speech forum like this - will say so.
That doesn't mean that "Grex the System" feels that non-members'
opinions are less valuable. "Grex the System" doesn't have opinions;
people do.
There are non-members here whose ideas REALLY SUCK (in my humble
opinion). On the other hand, there are members here whose ideas
really suck too. If the non-members with sucky ideas were to become
members, I doubt that their ideas would change much; nor would my
opinion of them.
Well those are some of my thoughts, for whatever they're worth.
As a reality check, I'll point out that any change in voting policy
requires a bylaw amendment, which means that advocates of the change
will need to convince 3/4 of those voting that the policy change is
a good idea. If you're serious about effecting a policy change,
you might want to factor that into your strategic thinking.
|
slynne
|
|
response 15 of 73:
|
Nov 21 18:42 UTC 2002 |
Honestly, I am less interested in an actual policy change than I am in
taking the opportunity once in a while to remind everyone that just
because someone chooses not to be a member of grex, that doesnt mean
that they arent a member of the social group that is grex.
|
gull
|
|
response 16 of 73:
|
Nov 21 18:55 UTC 2002 |
Re #3: I honestly haven't seen more than one or two specific people say that
someone's opinion doesn't hold weight because they're not a member. I know
*I* don't feel that way, and I'd guess the majority of Grexers don't either.
What I *do* often see are some people who, when an idea they present is
rejected for some reason, decide that they're being singled out for abuse
because they're non-members. I don't think that's the case. It's not all
that easy, when reading a conference, to identify who is a member and who
isn't, unless they make a big deal about not being one. (For example, by
trying to blackmail Grex by saying they won't become a member, or will cease
being a member, unless such-and-such happens.)
On occasion people *have* said, 'if you feel this strongly about it, become
a member and run for the board.' I think that's a reasonable thing to say,
because if you want to make real change elected office is a good place to
push for it.
|
cross
|
|
response 17 of 73:
|
Nov 21 20:09 UTC 2002 |
I don't know if it revolves around ``members'' in the sense of people
who give grex money, but I think it might revolve around ``members'' of
the grex inner circle. What's wrong with questioning the status quo
around here?
|
other
|
|
response 18 of 73:
|
Nov 21 20:59 UTC 2002 |
Nothing at all. Just keep in mind that it is a lot easier to question a
status quo than to create one, and the creation process is ongoing and
has been so for many years. A lot of things are the way they are because
it was a hell of a lot easier to do that that way than any other way
considering how they were being done before. This is just a fact of
organizational reality. No, it is not necessarily the best way, but it
was what we could afford (in time and/or money).
I personally like having the status quo questioned, and the reasons
behind it made clear, and improvements made, if possible.
The only difference, as far as I can tell, between the 'inner circle,' as
you call it, and everyone else, is that the 'inner circle' folks are more
familiar with the whys and wherefores of Grex's current structure. This
is not a defense of the status quo, it is merely an acknowledgement that
the resources available sometimes determine the state of reality more
than what makes sense in the ideal world.
|
mary
|
|
response 19 of 73:
|
Nov 21 21:25 UTC 2002 |
Think of who you consider to be "inner circle" and then consider whether
they are there because they gave $5 a month to Grex or because they have
donated huge amounts of their own time and/or expertise to make sure Grex
is available for all to use.
Of course, they don't see themselves as special or powerful or
even privileged. Mostly, they're just frustrated at not having
even more time to donate to needed projects.
Now, tell me again how Grex is so unfair?
|
slynne
|
|
response 20 of 73:
|
Nov 21 22:32 UTC 2002 |
I think it is possible to acknowledge that people who post interesting
things into bbs are valuable without taking away from acknowledging the
hard work of people who have donated huge amounts of their time and/or
expertise to make sure grex is available for everyone. This might be a
way, btw, to suck new people with fresh ideas and more energy into
donating time, money, energy etc.
|
carson
|
|
response 21 of 73:
|
Nov 21 23:56 UTC 2002 |
(does anyone actually check the membership roll before deciding how
to respond to various users? I certainly don't keep track of who's
kicked in $6 for a particular month. heck, I can hardly keep track
of who's on the board.) :P
|
i
|
|
response 22 of 73:
|
Nov 22 03:22 UTC 2002 |
Amusing idea: replace PicoSpan/Backtalk with SlashCode (as used by
www.slashdot.org & others) and let everyone rack up unlimited karma
points. Maybe sell karma point on the side at $5 per to milk wealthy
jerks trying to fake the lofty karma scores of highly respected regulars.
SlashCode also makes it quick & easy to zip past responses from trolls,
dittoheads, spewers, etc....
|
remmers
|
|
response 23 of 73:
|
Nov 22 10:50 UTC 2002 |
Re #20: Whether they say so out loud or not, I think that just
about everybody realizes that people who post interesting things
in bbs are central to what makes the Grex community work.
|
aruba
|
|
response 24 of 73:
|
Nov 22 14:35 UTC 2002 |
I certainly agree with that.
|