A86: Re: Re: Re: Account Abuse
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
A86: Re: Re: Re: Account Abuse
That was essentially how ticalc.org operated from when it started until the fall
of 1998, when Chris and Magnus proposed the "artificial structure". Magnus was
more or less the natural leader on things, because at least in part since he
owned the server we were using at the time (and still do). However, I did my
job not because I was told to do it, but because I wanted to do it and do a good
job also. But now, more or less, people do things because if they don't, they
will come under fire from the artificial powers that exist.
Staff structures such as the one ticalc.org uses now would work fine for a large
organization where the percentage of coordinators to regular staff is small.
But 50% of the ticalc.org staff are coordinators, that is just crazy.
I don't exactly want to start a huge thread on this issue either, since its semi
off-topic. But David, you did write a lot there. :)
Bryan
"The power to, as you say "romp on over you", comes from the fact that a
majority of the staff says so." - Magnus Hagander, 22 November 1998
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Phillips" <david@acz.org>
To: <assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org>; <accounts@ticalc.org>; <mha@ticalc.org>;
<aselle@ticalc.org>; <dornfeld@ticalc.org>; <isaac@ticalc.org>;
<abuse@ticalc.org>; <nhaines@ticalc.org>; <news@ticalc.org>
Cc: <ACZ@acz.org>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2000 7:33 PM
Subject: A86: Re: Re: Account Abuse
>
> Although I find this interesting, I do not want to get involved in this
> debate. I just want to point something out that I have noticed, especially
> since I have not noticed this in many other groups.
>
> ACZ was started about a year and three months ago. Ever since the
> beginning, we have never had any predefined leadership roles. Every member
> is equal, and I doubt this will ever change. Seniority and other factors do
> not affect anything. When a new member joins, he has just as much say as
> someone who has been in the group since the beginning.
>
> Any major decision, such as a new member, is made by the entire group,
> either as a discussion or a vote. Votes are almost never a yes or no type
> of vote, but a discussion where each member states his feelings on the
> issue. Votes on new members (which is about the only thing we really need
> to make decisions about) are always unanimous for several reasons. The
> first is in order to keep members from getting upset. The second reason is
> that if someone has an opinion contrary to everyone else, they have a good
> reason for it.
>
> This system is not exactly numerically fair, of course. If a member doesn't
> want to state his opinion, then they don't get any say in the matter. But
> that is his choice, and is not because of some artificial system. The
> members with natural leadership tendencies will obviously come ahead in
> these matters. But it is in a natural manner, and not artificial.
> Therefore, it is generally accepted by everyone, at least much more than in
> an artificial leadership system. Whenever there is a group of people, some
> of the people will be leaders and some will be followers. Doing anything
> else goes against the natural system and tends to cause problems.
>
> People that naturally lead do so because that is what they want to do. A
> person will take charge because he wants to change or accomplish something.
> Other people will follow because that is what they want to do, rather than
> being told to follow. Problems arise when artificially created leaders inte
> rfere with natural leaders. A person will be artificially put in charge of
> a group and want to do something one way, but will not want to do it
> themselves. The person that is instructed to actually do it will want to do
> it differently, which causes problems. Members that follow other members
> will do so because they respect their opinions and experience.
>
> A major drawback is that some members will not want to do anything at times,
> or will not be motivated to do something, and without any defined
> leadership, it is hard to change that. However, a natural leader should be
> able to inspire them to accomplish things, or else they should not be in the
> group in the first place. If a member is not going to do anything, then
> that cannot be changed, no matter what. Another drawback is that the
> members with natural leadership skills will eventually get tired and burned
> out. But at that point, they need to either take a break, or find something
> that they enjoy doing. An artifical leader will not be able to inspire
> them, but will rather just make them frustrated and upset.
>
> I realize that this system will not work for everything, and will not work
> with large groups. It is a perfect solution for a perfect problem, which of
> course doesn't exists. But I believe that for small groups, this is the
> closest thing to the best solution.
>
>
> Later,
>
> --
> David Phillips <david@acz.org>
> http://www.acz.org/
>
> > I formally request that the real, exact reason why this action was taken.
> I
> > did nothing to warrant such an extreme course of action. Also, I am under
> the
> > impression that Nathan is the "head" of the News section and is also the
> person
> > in charge of deleting comments. After talking to him a few days ago, I
> > discovered that he was on vacation while this whole drama took place on
> your
> > staff mailing list, and he had no real input into the decision. He
> doesn't even
> > understand fully why this action was taken. This completely baffles me
> why
> > Nathan of all people wouldn't know this. Why don't you explain
> yourselves?
> >
> > Bryan
> >
> > "Let me remind people that we're not in the business of censorship" -
> Chris
> > Dornfeld, 4 November 1998
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <accounts@ticalc.org>
> > To: <rabelerb@pilot.msu.edu>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 23, 1999 9:46 PM
> > Subject: Account Abuse
> >
> >
> > > Bryan,
> > >
> > > We sent you an initial warning regarding your
> > > abusive usage of your ticalc.org account.
> > >
> > > We sent you a second warning after continued
> > > abuse of your account and disabled your account's posting privileges
> > > for one week. You were warned that further abuse would result in
> > > total loss of account or posting privileges.
> > >
> > > It is our judgment that you have once again continued to abuse your
> > > ticalc.org account, and this is a notification that we have revoked
> > > your posting privileges permanently.
> > >
> > > Please do not appeal this action; ticalc.org accounts are a privilege
> > > offered by ticalc.org and subject to the sole discretion of ticalc.org
> > > staff.
> > >
> > > Additionally, you are reminded of our policy of allowing only one
> > > account per user. You may not create another account to use for
> > > posting. Any user holding multiple accounts will have all accounts
> > > removed and may lose all access to the site.
> > >
> > > - the ticalc.org Staff
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
References: