PKMN.NET Forums
General Category => Updates => Topic started by: Typhlosion on August 13, 2009, 23:32
-
Details still to be finalised, but we feel this is the best way to address the concerns we've heard tonight.
We've concluded that we'd like to introduce a Member Council - a group of members, voted for and elected by yourselves with no staff input, who can listen to ANY issues that you all have and present them DIRECTLY to us in a real time conversation, where you have our full and undivided attention. We're busy people - I'm coming into my dissertation year now - but I'm sure we could all find a time that would suit us. I repeat, issues to be determined, but we're thinking of making it a monthly thing. The chat logs will of course be free for you to view afterwards.
So why do this when you can just post a topic? Well, you still can, but we feel that not only would it be a way to listen to a LOT of opinions all at once which are collected over time, but in addition, it's more personal than just posting a topic and waiting for a reply - you'll be dealing with the admins (and possibly mods) personally.
Again, we're yet to finalise the details, so again we'd like your suggestions/input here, but we're pretty much settled that if you all agree, it's a step in the right direction. We can't promise to do everything you ask for, of course, but we can promise we'll listen and take everything seriously, which perhaps isn't a feeling we successfully put across in the forums. Additionally, we would need to trust people to be mature about this. We're not prepared to have people use it as an excuse to just slag us off - we're after suggestions for improvement, rather than just a list of criticisms.
Also note we've never done this before: some things will work, others won't. Might be a case of trial and error for a while until we find a format that works for everyone.
PKMN.NET Senior Staff
-
I think this might be what the forums need in this situation, to bring the forums forward and to get past the bad stuff that's developed. As long as everyone gets an equal say in this, which will go up to the senior staff, then I'm all for the idea.
-
From my initial reaction, it seems as though this will either go in two directions. This has got to be a totally TRANSPARENT council.
If any part of the conversations in the council are kept hidden, then what has occured this evening will repeat itself over and over again.
-
I wouldn't mind a test drive.
-
From my initial reaction, it seems as though this will either go in two directions. This has got to be a totally TRANSPARENT council.
We won't have any input in who is in the council, that'll be up to you completely, so that shouldn't be an issue.
And with a number of council members (as many of possible) present in the meetings, I think one or two might notice if we start chopping the chat logs around.
-
I think this is a pretty darn good idea.
If it's someone's JOB to bring things to the attention of the admins and mods...it could bring some light on many bottled up situations like today's and have them sorted quietly and with no need for yelling and falling out.
Kudos to this plan and heres hoping it works. =>
-
Yeah, but that's what I'm asking - that the chat logs are to be made available to the whole site.
The whole reason this has got so out of hand is because of the sense of secrecy and 'behind the scenes.' No-one knows what goes on. Just like the April Fool's topic, suddenly, it was said to me DIRECTLY by Jeroen himself - "Those participating have decided to stop the argument" - or words to that effect.
I happened to be bloody participating and I'd signed no such silencing contract.
If this is to work, or to even get off the ground at all, all chat logs MUST be made available to the whole site.
Furthermore, isn't this what the whole point of the PKMN.NET board is for? For the members to bring issues up with the admins and actually GET a reply (unlike in Jessie's topic?)
-
...I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but can you clarify what you mean by "real time discussion"?
-
Yeah, but that's what I'm asking - that the chat logs are to be made available to the whole site.
Well we were planning to release them just to those who post regularly in Role Play...
Furthermore, isn't this what the whole point of the PKMN.NET board is for? For the members to bring issues up with the admins and actually GET a reply (unlike in Jessie's topic?)
I already addressed that, and Jessie's topic has had replies from two active admins, with the third having read it in detail.
...I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but can you clarify what you mean by "real time discussion"?
It'll be done over MSN or IRC, rather than the forums. A more personal touch.
-
Sounds like an interesting idea in theory. Should work well provided that people show up for the meetings, and others don't get sore for not being on the council itself.
Apart from those two points that could generate aggro I think it's a good idea.
-
This could end up being very successful and definitely is a great idea - The best response to complaints of the staff running everything would be to give power to the people. The best response to complaints that things are kept secret and hidden from everyday members is to show everyone what's happening.
Smart idea, hope this works.
-
Brill. Transparency for the win. K, next quezzies -
- How many members would this council have?
- How would they apply?
- For it to be totally admin-independent, how do you intend on hosting the 'elections?' Or will you elect someone to host said elections? :P
(And I know you've just gone to bed, but if I don't post now, I'll forget by tomorrow.)
-
Will the staff be controlling who gets kicked out of the Council? If so, then it doesn't sound like a good idea -- then that gives staff control over our positions too. The point is to give a member's full, honest, up-front opinion and ANY staff intervention would go against this idea. My personal belief is that the council themselves should choose whether or not whoever leaves or gets kicked out. There will be massive disagreements, sometimes there will be some agreements, but just know that I feel none of that should factor in the council status.
-
As this is a different topic, I feel more free to post now. Basic and brief, we're working on it. I found the draft I had made for this in the past (time issues prevented us from working on it then) which has ideas, but I can't say much for certain yet, especially as it's been a while since I last saw it, and even that was little more than a draft.
For the second, I think I can answer this - that'll likely just be posting in a topic. We don't want to make this too complicated either.
So yeah, I know, not the most useful of replies, but it's coming ;) Tomorrow evening is when we'll have more time.
To address Lord Raven's point: There will be limits placed. One thing we can say that the council will not be the place for personal attacks. It will be about the content of the site, not, say, how you hate the hair colour of those running it. How this will be enforced is undecided, but we will certainly put a limit on that in place and if someone does feel the need to come in just to continue making personal attacks, we will likely need to do something.
-
That's a given. No point if someone's going to be a massive dick about the way they're putting their point across. A warning slap or two to the people who do that is something I'd advocate.
-
Just as a question, how will this address the issue in the other thread? I thought that the PKMN.NET board was for opinions, suggestions and feedback as it is. While this may be a great idea, it's going off on a tangent from the original thread. I hope you haven't forgotten about that, because I know we haven't.
-
More to the point...how do we ensure this doesn't become a popularity contest?
-
More to the point...how do we ensure this doesn't become a popularity contest?
What kind of criteria do you think people should meet to deserve votes?
If it involves listening to people, then inevitably more popular people will have the advantage, eh.
-
What kind of criteria do you think people should meet to deserve votes?
I think it should be members who are known on the site, and are easy to talk. That way they can get the opinions and then pass it on in the hope of trying to improve the forums for the sake of the members if that makes sense.
As long as the person can do the job, then surely it doesn't matter whether they are popular or not?
-
I feel that it shouldn't be a full democracy; people who have opposing opinions to the staff and that have shown this should be apart of the Council -- devil's advocates are not hurtful especially since they lack power. I just feel the voting idea is flawed overall.
As long as the person can do the job, then surely it doesn't matter whether they are popular or not?
That's the thing, people will be elected based upon friends and not potential. It's more of a cause of someone that's speaking for the newbie who will need a good first impression. After all, without a good first impression the rest of the image is flawed. The way the site is currently run I feel is too strict, as well as the fact that it basically feels like a circle of friends these days as opposed to a full community. PUK can't get much new stuff if the staff keep running it too strict.
I'm not advocating complete destruction of the rules, just less enforcement. I feel the rules should not be so broad that they can easily be interpreted a million ways from Sunday, and that's what's wrong. I don't think a member council will shut us all up entirely either, because the more "popular" members are the ones that 100% agree with the staff and are more likely to be put on. It turns into a popularity contest in the end, not a contest of who is best at advising the leadership.
Our point is that it's a personality flaw that Joeno himself was completely unwilling to budge. The other staff are okay because they are open to complaint about the rules, but Joeno is always stern about what he says and not very often does he ever seem to agree with the other side. These are my experiences at least, when I asked some other staff their viewpoint about some bans I've had in private, they said "they wouldn't have done a ban."
A member council will not fix this, because it does not accurately represent the entirety of us because it is a popularity contest. What happens if the entire council are people who agree with the staff 100%? Then the many veteran members posting in the other thread have no voice at all, and there should be no reason that the minority be screwed over because a couple newbies who just joined and racked up 50 kajillion posts have a bigger voice than ours when we've seen what's been going on for years ourselves, and have actively defended you guys a couple years ago.
-
I dunno...is this not just a more attractive way of complaining? It's not like we have a whole forum for it already.
The issue wasn't that we didn't have a place to complain or suggest stuff...it was more that we felt that you, Jeroen, were unapproachable. I don't think this Council will help solve that at all.
-
Okay, stop this right there. The complaining about me goes in the other topic, this one is for the member council. Stick to it.
-
I think it's a pretty good idea... it's at least worth a try.
I think it'd would be good to have different council members from different sections of our community, such as the Spriting Community or the Role Playing community or the Team Building community, so that those council members can report the kinds of problems they see in those areas.
-
Okay, stop this right there. The complaining about me goes in the other topic, this one is for the member council. Stick to it.
I'm sorry? You've made the mistake of thinking my opinion of your leadership skills are confined to just one topic. This is not the case.
I didn't post in that topic and jump on a bandwagon because it seemed like a 'free shot at the admins' as some have described it. No, it was just the best place to post an opinion I've held for a long time.
This Member's Council strikes me as being the solution to the problem (the problem being Jessie's leaving post and the subsequent posts remarking on your reign as admin) and I think that your attitude makes you unnapproachable, rendering the Member's Council utterly obsolete. Would you rather me post why I think the Member's Council is a bad idea in the topic about Jessie's departure, rather than the topic which was created for discussion about it?
It seems you haven't taken a single thing underwing that was pointed out in the Truth topic Jeroen. Jessie left because she had an issue with you. The eight pages that followed were because people had an issue with you. A Member's Council, designed to bridge gaps between members and staff (the rest of whom, I do not have a problem with at all) is not addressing the issue that has caused this Council's herald.
I'm not suggesting the Council was created entirely because of the drama yesterday - I am fully aware that it was an idea before this all went on.
But the timing the staff has chosen to unveil this new project suggests that it is a direct response to yesterday's issue, and I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that it's completely avoided the main topic - which, as I've attempted to stress, is you, Jeroen.
We don't want to have a more 'personal touch' with the rest of the staff. I find it much easier to talk to Rex than I do you, or bring up an issue with Mike, than I could with you.
And really, as a member of staff myself (I am the co-leader of the SMP, after all,) I think that I too am approachable, and would greatly welcome anyone to challenge me on this point. I can't think of a single moderator or admin, who I would be hesitant about asking something, save for you.
So why create a Member's Council, supposedly designed to make staff more approachable, when everyone already feels comfortable with the majority of staff members anyway?!
And no, I'm not keeping my opinion of you confined to one topic. This doesn't end because I've stated my opinion of how I feel you've run the site. I'll keep on telling you how I feel until I feel it's changed. And I trust everyone else will too.
-
Isnt it a shame that we had to lose one of our most respected and well known members for this "solution" to rear it's ugly head. Sure you can throw some more mods in there, thats what these "Member Council" people are right? Mods without titles? Give it some time and they will all be groomed the same way other staff members have been and watch them have no effect whatsoever. Nice try guys.
-
Agreed Tim. It strikes us that you're just going to wait for the other thread to dissolve, Joeno. Which is a cowardly thing to do and completely dodging the points we've raised. You seem to be on the misunderstanding that we're posting to 'get something off our chests'. This is wrong. And to think that you can fob us off by ignoring the thread and then putting something like this through is just a joke really. We will not forget this, and we will continue to drag it up until we get what we think is a decent response from you.
-
Okay, shall we consider it cancelled to those who think it's a joke? Or can you only post degrading comments which add nothing to the topic? Are suggestions beyond you?
Unlocked by request, but let it be known I couldn't care less what you have to say in detail about the events of yesterday. That's completely off topic.
-
Thanks for unlocking the topic, Typhlosion!
Anyway, on topic:
In my opinion, at least, this plan is worth at least a trial, it may prove more successfull that people give it credit. I don't want to describe the two as being incredibly alike, but certainly in England (or my schoo, at any rate), we have a system of ‘Form Representatives’, who represent the various class forms (pupils in school are seperated into forms for registration and probably administrative reasons). Within the form, anybody is allowed to be put up for, or put themselves up for election on a yearly basis, and the majority vote of the class decides who becomes Form Rep.
So, who normally gets voted? Possibly to the surprise of some more cynical people, it is rarely the people who want to be Form Reps., nor is it the people who are ‘suck-ups’, often it is the most popular people, or the people with the best ideas (sometimes the two things are the same P: ).
I believe that the system here has the potential to mirror that in many ways - for the sake of example, I'll use Lord Raven. He clearly dissagrees with the behaviour of the administration, and I sincerely doubt that any amount of time spent discussing people's criticisms and suggestions with the staff would suddenly make him their bff. If he did, however, would it not be in the power of the people to have him removed, too? If you can elect somebody, surely it stands to reason that if you have the majority, you can have seombody de-elected.
Anyway, it might be fun. :)
-
Is this still cancelled then?
I thought it was a good idea, it will most likely work as well ^^
-
It sounds like a great idea, then the admins can have the issues members are having, without having to wade through thousands of topics to get to the bottom of members frustrations.
How would we choose our member council... members?
Would people volunteer and then we vote?
Edit: Oh it's cancelled... and It looks like I missed Drama. I hope no ones too upset. :(
-
I have to say, I fundamentally agree with this idea. I don't see how people can disagree with this, when this is what they've been asking for in the topic that seems to be raging still. It ensures the gap between staff and member is bridged, and allows the member faction to decide who they want to represent them. Also, this thing about it being a popularity contest, people generally are human beings. They are swayed by tradition or background, even in General Elections in the real world. So in essence, that makes it a popularity contest, but a more structured popularity contest.
Let's put it this way. Candidate A has a different policy, Policy X. Candidate B has another policy, Policy Y. The people who like Policy X will therefore 'prefer' the person that is Candidate A and vote that way. In the next UK General Election, I think that some people will vote against Gordon Brown and the Labour party simply because they don't like him, not because of the policies, but that's what people think. You can't invalidate an idea because people might not sue their votes in the way that you specifically want them to; that's why campaigning is paramount. And I'm sure that most members who witnessed this event, raging on at the moment, will see the gravity of this and vote seriously. Even if you have stupid votes in real General Elections, the number of people voting for the BNP or the Monster Raving Loony Party won't affect the general outcome of the votes.
Isn't that a problem that democracy has and will always have, but makes it such a powerful tool for voicing opinions?
-
@Lorem Ipsum: That's very true.
Maybe an idea would be to make the candidates anonymous? Like have a form that each candidate fills out which is then posted by one of the mods/admins.
People then vote purely on policy and thus preventing it becoming 'OMG XYZ IS MY BEST FRIEND!!1111 *votes* and more like 'mmmmm XYZ has some good ideas *votes*'
-
Is this cancelled? I sincerely hope it's not. Despite all the criticisms it's getting, it's a brilliant idea.
Now, to me, there seems to be two main things being complained about.
1. It will be a popularity contest - I don't disagree with this, but I don't see how this is exactly a bad thing either. Surely, people who are popular would want to keep that favorable appearance by actually listening to what people have to say and bringing those issues up. And if someone who honestly had no place on the Member Council ended up a candidate, I doubt any amount of popularity would help them win an election. I have at least enough sense to know an honest person I dislike deserves to be my representative more than a lackadaisical person I am friends with; I'm fairly sure that the community at large is just as logical. I trust them to make the right decisions, popularity aside.
2. The issue is with Jeroen, not the staff. - So it is. But this does seem like a step in the right direction. This is the staff, including Jeroen, showing that they are willing to give us a more personal, focused, concise voice to channel our concerns through - at least, that's how I see it. I don't think this is an opportunity to be passed up...otherwise the whole fiasco of the last few days might just run in circles.
I hope this doesn't sound like me "sucking up" to either party, considering how I had arguably held an opposite opinion in the other topic. I was just a little surprised at some of the criticisms this was getting and wanted to offer my two cents.
-
I think, with some proper modifications to the original idea posted by Peter (not going to list them. if Harry, Mitch and Peter want to know they can PM me or MSN me), and a bit of control, or rather "self-restraint" when it comes to some members, as well as a very strong bypass filter for members and representitives, this would be an excellent idea.
As when it comes to the popularity contests, I think what we can do is that each applicant submits anything via PM to the Staff / People organizing this thing, who in turn post replacing names with "Member X" or "The Candidate" or something like this, to keep as much anonymousity as possible. This is again, reliant on self control, so you don't go around saying "this is my idea 8D" etc.
However, Harry mentioned that it will always happen, but if we can control it as much as possible, and I know this goes against the whole point, we will able to make it fairer in the long run. After all, let's say Member X is utterly useless but has lots of friends. They get voted in. they do nothing, and this causes problems arranging a by-election, usurping their power, etc.
I think anything not set in stone will need some heavy filters to be successful and unbiased. This involves jobs, abilities and the like, as well as candidates and Member-elects.
As for the actual topic itself, I think that a Member Council is just what this site needs. Considering our bad publicity, as well as several well known issues regarding Staff-Member relations, perhaps a neutral ground on both sides will help to negotiate terms between two parties. Of course, again, the filter for members comes into it; a need for good English, good manners, and to have at least some actual respect from a lot of people are only basic points which the representitives need in order to make this successful. Of course, I'm not saying new members who neglect capital letters should be prevented from applying, I should just say that what they do, and their Social Background and Social Abilities rather than their personal background is to be considered when selecting people. But the fact still remains that should this project see official light, I'm sure it'll be a great success for the site as a whole.
Yes, there will be problems, similar to every democratic government ever in history. Yes, there will be rebellers and protesters, there may be some people who disagree on policies, views and ideas, but when you look at a majority, you can't satisfy every individual. That's something I've learnt whilst applying for Head Boy, but that's another story. However, each representitive must be aware of EVERYBODY. That odd person with posts barely in double digits may want something impossible, but they cannot be ignored - they're a member too, and what they say counts.
This is needs LOTS of co-operation from everybody if it is to be the gleaming success we want it to be, and I think with something this important, the members of PKMN.net can at least band together. There will be a need to hide nominations and candidates. There will be a need to restrict a lot of crucial ideas and points, but no democracy is ever perfect.
that's my 200 cents.
-
The members elected need to know what they are talking about, first and foremost. Although it has been already addressed a member in the council who doesn't use IRC but is elected for the IRC place (not saying there is or will even be an IRC spot on the member council) would be useless, but if it is someone popular who is a big name around the forums then people would go, "Hey, look, he's cool, let's choose him!"
This has nothing to do with Joeno, in my honest opinion. It is a member council, not a Joeno council, so why are we all complaning about him in this thread? This has been worked on 110% by Mulholland just to name one.
I agree with Zy's solution to the popularity problem - send in anonymous 'resumes', if you call them that, as to why you would be capable (insert other generic interview/criteria questions) etcetc and then they would be picked by the members as to which looked the most appropriate on paper, not on who is the hottest or who has the most karma.