a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

[Tony Rose]

Just so that no one is blind-sided.

I'm going to go on main and suggest a member-initiated action.  I'm going to ask that, in keeping with the charter, 18 members sign a petition calling for a membership vote on content moderation of the chat list.  I'm starting with the members rather than here because we've got two list moderators as board members, because it is a matter that doesn't need a top-down approach, and, because, frankly, I don't think I've got the votes here to do what I think the majority of the members will want.

I am NOT going to cross-post the petition to the chat list itself, just on main.  The vote itself, if it materializes, will need to take place like a board election, with voting tokens going out to members.  The petition signatories will have to vetted for membership, of course.

I won't start the petition for at least a couple of hours, giving ya'll time to tell me I'm going at this wrong and to persuade me that you are correct.





tony

[Lionel English]

There's no voting mechanism in place on main. You'd have to rely on a show of hands.

I'm not sure how appropriate it is to ask members of one list a question that's really about another.

Lionel English
lio...@beanmar.net

--
GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/gcd-board

[Donald Dale Milne]

Hmmm...if the charter allows for the members to petition for a
membership vote, but we have no mechanism for such a vote, then we have
a larger problem to tackle first.

- Don

On 3/8/2012 9:45 AM, Lionel English wrote:
>
> There's no voting mechanism in place on main. You'd have to rely on a
> show of hands.
>
> I'm not sure how appropriate it is to ask members of one list a
> question that's really about another.
>
> Lionel English

> lio...@beanmar.net <mailto:lio...@beanmar.net>

>
> On Mar 8, 2012 6:36 AM, "Tony Rose" <tonyr...@comcast.net

> <mailto:tonyr...@comcast.net>> wrote:
>
> Just so that no one is blind-sided.
>
> I'm going to go on main and suggest a member-initiated action.
> I'm going to ask that, in keeping with the charter, 18 members
> sign a petition calling for a membership vote on content
> moderation of the chat list. I'm starting with the members rather
> than here because we've got two list moderators as board members,
> because it is a matter that doesn't need a top-down approach, and,
> because, frankly, I don't think I've got the votes here to do what
> I think the majority of the members will want.
>
> I am NOT going to cross-post the petition to the chat list itself,
> just on main. The vote itself, if it materializes, will need to
> take place like a board election, with voting tokens going out to
> members. The petition signatories will have to vetted for
> membership, of course.
>
> I won't start the petition for at least a couple of hours, giving
> ya'll time to tell me I'm going at this wrong and to persuade me
> that you are correct.
>
>
>
>
>
> tony
> --
> GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:gcd-...@googlegroups.com>

> To unsubscribe send email to
> gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:gcd-board%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

[Tony Rose]

It's a GCD business matter and that should be discussed on main.  I plan to ask for folks to add their names to a petition e-mail and send it back to the list.  Petitions are not secret ballot-type things.




tony

---

From: "Lionel English" <lio...@beanmar.net>
To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2012 8:45:03 AM
Subject: Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

[Tony Rose]

I think Lionel was referring to the petition itself.  We have a membership vote mechanism; we use it for board elections.




tony

---

From: "Donald Dale Milne" <dond...@att.net>
To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2012 8:51:01 AM

Subject: Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

[Lionel English]

They can vote.  There'sjust no fancy token system in place.  That was developed specifically for the policy list, which was created specifically to decide on things.

The 18 members clause pre-dates that by a good decade.

Lionel English
lio...@beanmar.net

   <mailto:gcd-board@googlegroups.com>

   To unsubscribe send email to

   gcd-board+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

   <mailto:gcd-board%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
   For more options, visit this group at
   http://groups.google.com/group/gcd-board

--
GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/gcd-board

--
GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

[Alexandros Diamantidis]

* Tony Rose [2012-03-08 14:54]:

> It's a GCD business matter and that should be discussed on main. I plan to ask for folks to add their names to a petition e-mail and send it back to the list. Petitions are not secret ballot-type things.

In fact, if I'm reading our charter correctly, it wouldn't even have to
be discussed on main first. It would be just as correct procedurally for
some members to draft a petition in private, sign it, and present it to
the board. Discussion in main is just a shortcut, while also keeping the
whole thing in the open, which is a plus.

Alexandros

[Alexandros Diamantidis]

* Lionel English [2012-03-08 06:57]:
> They can vote. There's just no fancy token system in place.

Right, and no tokens are needed - if the petition goes forward and we
reach a vote, the members will just get personal mails directing them to
the site, where they can vote after logging in. The site will ensure
that only GCD members will be able to vote. The membership list held by
the site should be accurate, since it was reviewed for the last
elections, and the site automatically promotes new members as they
achieve membership requirements.

(Just for the record and for any members following the board list from
the web - I know Lionel knows all this!)

Alexandros

[Tony Rose]

I knew it, too, but got momentarily confused.



tr

---

From: "Alexandros Diamantidis" <ad...@hellug.gr>
To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2012 9:08:21 AM

Subject: Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

--
GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com

[Lionel English]

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 6:36 AM, Tony Rose <tonyr...@comcast.net> wrote:

I am NOT going to cross-post the petition to the chat list itself, just on main.  The vote itself, if it materializes, will need to take place like a board election, with voting tokens going out to members.  The petition signatories will have to vetted for membership, of course.

Sorry, I misread the above (it's very early here :-) and thought you were suggesting tokens for the petition.  I'm clear now.  There is a voting system in place for charter amendments.  I'm not sure exactly what you're proposing, so I'm not sure if that will be usable or not.

--
Lionel English

San Diego, CA
lio...@beanmar.net

[Ray Bottorff Jr]

I will support it Tony.

 

my best

-Ray

[Daniel Nauschuetz]

i am a bit confused? why is this NOT on the board agenda? why are we pushing this as an initiative when the board hasnt been given the opportunity to address this first? the votes are not fixed nor particularly one sided. i count three opposed (maybe 2), three for and three silent. shouldnt the board take this opportunity to review the list admin role of moderation? it was vaguely defined.

give us a chance to work through this. if you want to keep the petition going, i will remain an observer.

daniel

----------
Sent from AT&T's Wireless network using Mobile Email

[Andres Jimenez]

Hi, all

I think moderation is needed and I support our Mailing Lists admins. I am  sure they have always done that task with their best will and have never intended to apply any kind of censorship on anybody. As human beings, they can make mistakes from  time to time, but I do not think this is being addressed in this discussion. 

I have to admit I didn't follow the original thread on gcd-chat as I removed my subscription to that list because I knew this very kind of totally unrelated topics would be a constant source of bitter confrontation. This current situation just supports my opinions on the matter.

I will also gladly support any kind of membership involvement in the GCD's structure and policies, but I would appreciate that any vote is preceded by a discussion on the different alternatives that want to be offered to the membership.
Before a vote is open we need to be sure that all options are covered in the ballot.
At the moment,  the only thing I am seeing is people taking sides, like if they were preparing for war.

Just my 2 cents

Andrés        

El 10/03/2012 19:12, "Daniel Nauschuetz" <nausc...@yahoo.com> escribió:

[Daniel Nauschuetz]

This thread has been an emotionally charged discourse.

I am strongly against jumping to petition without giving the Board a chance to address the concerns.  I don't believe any of us have a lack of confidence that we can discuss this issue with an open mind. 

Ray identified a real problem.  Where is the policy that lets everybody know under what conditions a List Admin can moderate?  I have tried (unsuccessfully) to show a possible root cause.  The Board never defined those guidelines leaving the Admins to do their best to make those determinations on their own.  We left them to hang by not providing any direction, so this situation is our fault -- NOT their fault. 

Shall I call for a motion on this item or should I stand aside and let this incident run its course?

Daniel

---

From: Andres Jimenez <gand...@gmail.com>
To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

[Lionel English]

I think I buried this comment in a longer posting earlier, but as a not disinterested bystander, I feel it would be better for Lou to wield the gavel on this.  That said, if Lou wants me to add something to the agenda for him, I can do this.  I'm just not clear what, exactly, is being advocated so far.  Tony and Ray seem to me to have two different agendas.

[Donald Dale Milne]

Perhaps three different agendas. I brought up the problem posed by
some members reading things delayed on digest mode, as that relates to
warning messages that may be read after they had violated the warning.
I must admit, I'm not sure how an admin would discover this, other than
a member pointing out that he had not been able to read the warning
before posting. I'll give some thought to what, if anything, I can
propose regarding this.

- Don

> <mailto:gcd-...@googlegroups.com>

> To unsubscribe send email to
> gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:gcd-board%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/gcd-board
>
> --
> GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:gcd-...@googlegroups.com>

> To unsubscribe send email to
> gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:gcd-board%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/gcd-board
>
> --
> GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:gcd-...@googlegroups.com>

> To unsubscribe send email to
> gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:gcd-board%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/gcd-board
>
>
>
>
> --
> Lionel English
> San Diego, CA

> lio...@beanmar.net <mailto:lio...@beanmar.net>

[Lou Mazzella]

It doesn't hurt to put forward a motion. This is a situation that needs to be addressed and it doesn't seem likely that the petition currently circulating will get enough signatures anyway.

-Lou

---

From: Daniel Nauschuetz <nausc...@yahoo.com>
To: "gcd-...@googlegroups.com" <gcd-...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:00 AM

[Lou Mazzella]

Lionel,

I think what we should be looking at is defining rules for moderating the mailing lists, specifically those related to message content vs. user behavior. I think an appropriate agenda item would be Setting Guidelines for Mailing List Admins.

-Lou

---

From: Lionel English <lio...@beanmar.net>

To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:04 AM
Subject: Re: Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

[Ray Bottorff Jr]

I think I buried this comment in a longer posting earlier, but as a not disinterested bystander, I feel it would be better for Lou to wield the gavel on this.  That said, if Lou wants me to add something to the agenda for him, I can do this.  I'm just not clear what, exactly, is being advocated so far.  Tony and Ray seem to me to have two different agendas.

But not mutually exclusive. Mine original intent was to be removed off moderation due to the unfairness of how I got there using the policies of appeals to the Board. Tony's intent is broader answer to the issue and I full support the effort.

my best

-Ray

[Tony Rose]

As I said, I think this needs to be a "grass-roots" thing.  My reasoning included several factors, a major one being that two of the admins are board members and the effect of this vote, should it be realized, would be to direct the admins to take certain (non-) actions.




tony

---

From: "Daniel Nauschuetz" <nausc...@yahoo.com>
To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 12:12:18 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

[Tony Rose]

All the proposed measure would do is require that the admins apply the current description of the list as their directive regarding moderation.

And, I must disagree with your statement:  "I am sure they [...] have never intended to apply any kind of censorship on anybody."  That is exactly what they are doing and it is their directly expressed intention to continue stifling conversations about politics and, I presume, religion.  Further, if you look at a simple thread that I started regarding the way science is reported, and my attempt to discuss comics news reporting, and the ridiculousness that followed almost immediately, it won't be long before they are banning discussion of science.  I would like to note that one of the bomb throwers in 'my' thread is also one of the people that should have been called down in the infamous thread.

If my petition fails to garner enough support, and I think it's going to fail, seeing as it didn't get any traction this weekend, I will support some sort of action to *officially* ban politics and/or religion or any other topic from the chat list.

Note that the provision for member-initiated actions does not have a time-frame for ratification by petition.  Sort of like the US Constitution amendment procedures, it could hang out there forever or until it gets enough signatures, but I will stop supporting it if it doesn't get enough signatures by the end of this week.


tony

---

From: "Andres Jimenez" <gand...@gmail.com>

To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 5:09:50 PM

Subject: Re: Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

[Tony Rose]

You are certainly entitled to make a motion but the petition process is in progress and I think would trump any final board decision.

And, we did NOT leave the admins out to hang.  They were board members when the positions were created and Lionel and Ralf have advocated from the beginning that the ability to moderate the way they did in this instance is inherent in the role of list administrator.  I disagree.

If the petition fails to garner enough support then the matter will be back in the hands of the board and I will move to ban discussion of politics and religion on the chat list and any other topic that any other board member wants to ban.

tony

---

From: "Daniel Nauschuetz" <nausc...@yahoo.com>
To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 12:00:57 AM

[Tony Rose]

I think that my petition makes it clear what I am advocating:  no moderation for content on the chat list.  I have not noticed that Ray has an agenda as present.

It is Lionel's "not disinterested bystander" role (among other reasons) that led me to created a member-driven petition.  There is no need for Lou to assume the gavel; the board has no action to take.





tony

---

From: "Lionel English" <lio...@beanmar.net>

To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 12:04:10 AM
Subject: Re: Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

[Donald Dale Milne]

I will not support such a motion if made. The original stated
purpose of the Chat list explicitly allowed all topics, and I continue
to believe our little community needs a place to talk about non-comics
topics that interest us. I believe that people who do not wish to hear
such conversations can just quit listening, either by deleting messages
in a thread or by staying on the "safe" Main e-mail list.

- Don Milne

[Tony Rose]

Don, you know what I want, but if it is going to be left to the list admins to pick and choose what subjects are allowed, I want them to nail it down.

And why haven't you signed the petition?   :)

tony

---

From: "Donald Dale Milne" <dond...@att.net>
To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 11:22:36 AM

Subject: Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

[Donald Dale Milne]

Haven't signed it yet because what it aims to do is just what we're
already doing for the most part. I didn't think we needed to codify it
but I'll reconsider.

- Don Milne

On 3/12/2012 12:26 PM, Tony Rose wrote:
> Don, you know what I want, but if it is going to be left to the list
> admins to pick and choose what subjects are allowed, I want them to
> nail it down.
>
> And why haven't you signed the petition? :)
>
>
>
> tony
>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Donald Dale Milne" <dond...@att.net>
> *To: *gcd-...@googlegroups.com
> *Sent: *Monday, March 12, 2012 11:22:36 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

[Lou Mazzella]

I agree with Don and wouldn't support such a motion either. I feel that the proper thing to do is to make sure that the admins are not destroying threads, but moderating the behavior of those individuals that do get out of hand.

-Lou

---

From: Donald Dale Milne <dond...@att.net>
To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: [gcd-board] a proposed member-initiated, well, proposal

-- GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+unsub...@googlegroups.com

[Lionel English]

I think you mischaracterize the situation.  Bear in mind that quite a few members of the chat list *have asked* that political discussions be kept off the list.  Several people made that request at the beginning of last week's thread, before any of the moderators said anything.  I'm aware of what the list charter says--I wrote it, IIRC--but some of you act like Ralf simply shut the thread down on a whim, which is clearly not true.  One of our board members left the chat list because he was tired of having to avoid threads on politics.  Perhaps, instead of arguing our own ideals, we should take a poll of the people who are actually on the chat list to find out what they would and would not like to see there.

[Donald Dale Milne]

Perhaps this would be useful. However, some things to be aware of
with polls of any sort are that they are volunteered data and many
people will just not participate. And, in this situation, there is no
way to poll people NOT on the list to see what would get them on it.
Both mean you are not quite measuring what you hoped to measure.

- Don Milne