Procedures: how are we to decide?

[longhair75]

We need to bring some order to the chaos we have now. We are getting nowhere fast.

I would suggest a parlimentary style: You have an idea? Put it forth as a motion. Once the motion is seconded, we should designate a time frame for discussion. Once the time frame is expired, a poll would be created where all could vote on the proposal.

[TomUK]

In my opinion the following needs to happen.

1. The STR mods need to close all current threads regarding new rules, subforums etc.
2. A moratorium on discussing those topics should be requested.
3. The STR mods need to take a week (at least i'd say) to try and digest the proposals and ideas already made.
4. A list ranking what needs to be done should be created. With the most important issues at the top (ie. who is a Christian, who is Anglican etc) and least important near the bottom (should we have x subforum). This should then be posted in STR for the membership to view and if needed comment.
5. Then over the next few weeks we will take each issue in turn. A mod will start a thread for each topic (more than one if necessary) and will act as chair. I would propose here that the membership consent to stricter moderation of their posts in order to keep the threads as on topic and concise as possible.
6. Once a decision has been made then a mod will close that thread, implement the change, wait perhaps two days, and then go the next item on the list.

A consequence of Erwins reforms as that our leadership is no longer in the executive but in the moderators of this forum. If we don't allow them to take charge of this process then everything is going to descend into anarchy.

[EvAng]

A consequence of Erwins reforms as that our leadership is no longer in the executive but in the moderators of this forum. If we don't allow them to take charge of this process then everything is going to descend into anarchy.

:amen:

[longhair75]

Speaking for my colleagues on the moderator staff, We will do the best we can to prioritize our issues.

[Wigglesworth]

It seems to me that we could start out with the same structure we had before if the STR members would simply vote on it now. That structure could be changed in the future in an orderly way, but why not restore the same foundation we had. Nobody has disagreed with this that I'm aware of.

STR membership needs to approve a basic ruleset for STR to give the mods some legitimacy under this new system. Aside from all the bickering about subforums and creeds, I think everybody here would agree on what's in the wiki right now. Let's approve it, so our mods can apply it now!

By the way, I added a revision of Pamela's sticky to the wiki. We don't have to change any rules to stabilize the forum at the moment; we just need to formally approve of the way it was with a popular vote.

Peace

:crossrc:

[Inside Edge]

We need to bring some order to the chaos we have now. We are getting nowhere fast.

I would suggest a parlimentary style: You have an idea? Put it forth as a motion. Once the motion is seconded, we should designate a time frame for discussion. Once the time frame is expired, a poll would be created where all could vote on the proposal.
Totally. I second that, big time.

1. The STR mods need to close all current threads regarding new rules, subforums etc.
I agree.

2. A moratorium on discussing those topics should be requested.
3. The STR mods need to take a week (at least i'd say) to try and digest the proposals and ideas already made.
I don't totally agree. :) A week is an eternity in "internet time." Furthermore, there is great interest and opinion on these matters, and I'm never a proponent of quashing discussion. Moderating it, yes. I would suggest, after locking the current threads, a short moratorium while the Mods re-organize them and post "official" threads for the discussion of specific rule sets. We can then continue discussion in centralized, more logical and appropriate places.
4. A list ranking what needs to be done should be created. With the most important issues at the top (ie. who is a Christian, who is Anglican etc) and least important near the bottom (should we have x subforum). This should then be posted in STR for the membership to view and if needed comment.

Another good idea - prioritize the rule/regulation sets we want to implement.
5. Then over the next few weeks we will take each issue in turn. A mod will start a thread for each topic (more than one if necessary) and will act as chair. Again, good concept but I hate the timeline. Weeks? Look how fast we go-round in just a few days? If it's going to take weeks more, I'll just leave and come back in a few months and abide by whatever you all, who have far more patience, decide to do.
A consequence of Erwins reforms as that our leadership is no longer in the executive but in the moderators of this forum. If we don't allow them to take charge of this process then everything is going to descend into anarchy.
I completely agree. I think the Mods should defintely be taking motions for specific rules, creating proper threads for discussion of them, and preparing to poll-vote for the changes after a defined period of time.

[karen freeinchristman]

Yep. Agree with Inside Edge. :thumbsup:

[karen freeinchristman]

Main problem is, Cola and Peter seem to be the only Mods that are consistantly around at this time.

[Fish and Bread]

I would like to see all rules-related threads closed except for the motion to set up a vote on the current wiki rules thread. And then handle things in some kind of set order so we're not doing everything at once, beginning immediately (Periods of reflection are nice, but this is a strain on a lot of folks on both sides of discussions and there is no point to dragging it out). For example:

1. Vote: Do we approve our current wiki main forum rules?

If not approved, we go back to step 1. If approved, we go to:

2. Vote: Should there be two sub-forums set up for conservatives and progressives?

If 2 passes, we go to:

3a. Drafting, discussion and voting on sub-forum guidelines and rules

If two fails we go to:

3b. Request for motions: Other proposals relating to forum governance that do not contradict established rules.

If there are none, the process ends. If there are some, we go to:

3c. Vote on other motions one at a time.

Sound workable?

[Wigglesworth]

It's not nice to close threads.

[longhair75]

I haven't closed anyone's threads, nor do I plan to

[Colabomb]

I agree there is no good reason to close a thread that's not a rule violation.

Believe it or not I am a fairly liberal moderator.

[Inside Edge]

Well longhair...Wigglesworth...I can't imagine how you're going to order anything without closing some of the million threads that are raging right now - especially when 2 or 3 threads all discuss the same thing.

At some point, you're going to have to find a way to channel the discussion on a specific topic into one thread, and if you don't close the others...well, I guess you could pray that people let the other threads go...

[longhair75]

We have a motion to accept the Wiki that is under discussion. This is the focus at the moment. The rest is just non binding discussion. Everyone need to be able to air their views, and stifling the conversation would be rude and heavy handed.

[TomUK]

It's not nice to close threads.

The current reality isn't any nicer though. The situation that we currently face is that we are faced with a whole pile of decisions to make and no way of knowing what to do about them. There have been a couple of instances where PV has tried to create some movement but he has been shouted down with "who do you think you are" sort of comments.

Maybe it's not nice to close peoples threads but we're are never going to make any progress based on how things are currently proceeding. Someone (in my opinion a member of staff) needs to say "this is what we'll be discussing, this is when we'll be discussing it". If a member deviates of the topic then the mod should be able to delete that to ensure we remain on task.

I am not criticising longhair or cola as they have both done an amazing job. However Erwin has shifted their role from moderator (ie. one who moderates posts) to something closely resembling a community leader. This is a massive shift and one which is going to take some time getting used to. However from now on they are the ones who are going to have to control the agenda. They are the ones who ultimately have to take control of the situation as leaders of this new community. What we are going to have to learn as community as members is to let them control the agenda. Otherwise we are going to see repeat performances of what has been going on over the past few days, which to blunt has been quite disgusting at times.

[Wigglesworth]

. . . I am not criticising longhair or cola as they have both done an amazing job. However Erwin has shifted their role from moderator (ie. one who moderates posts) to something closely resembling a community leader. This is a massive shift and one which is going to take some time getting used to. However from now on they are the ones who are going to have to control the agenda. They are the ones who ultimately have to take control of the situation as leaders of this new community. What we are going to have to learn as community as members is to let them control the agenda. Otherwise we are going to see repeat performances of what has been going on over the past few days, which to blunt has been quite disgusting at times.

Yes, our staff has been doing a commendable job working through the changes. Let's take a deep breath, get a good night's sleep, and expect this whole thing to work out.

Let's remember our mission outside of the board to pray without ceasing. May virtue increase and panic decrease. In the name of Christ our Lord.

Amen.

:crossrc:

[longhair75]

amen