A86: Re^9e99: Re: ACZ: Re: Account Abuse
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
A86: Re^9e99: Re: ACZ: Re: Account Abuse
DISCLAIMER: I don't know if this will post to a86 because I haven't
tried in a long, long time. If it doesn't, Scott, please forward it. I'll
read it eventually. :-)
On 10 Jan 00, at 21:38, Scott Noveck wrote:
> David, I have to say that your littlew essay there was one of the best
> discourses I've read in a LONG time. My only complaint is that it
> relies a LOT on the personalities of the group members. I'd like to
> think that everyone here is pretty intelligent (at least when it comes
> to the logic/math type problems we encounter when programming), and we
> all have a lot of respect for each other.
>
> For the most part, everyone in the group is very mature - I recall a
> nice little debate on here about the need for libraries, in which I
> stood alone against just about everyone else. But we were able to keep
> it to a mature exchange of ideas rather than let it grow to a heated
> argument, and the more I think over what Dux, Matt, David, and the rest
> of you said, the more I think you're right and I'm wrong.
I've read a86 for two years and I must say it's probably the most
intelligent of the mailing lists. You guys say a lot of insightful stuff
and you very rarely deviate from the topic.
> I get involved in a LOT of problems in real life because I'm very, very,
> very stubborn. And that's just because, from my (admittedly very
> conceited) point of view, I respect only a very small handful of people
> - those whom I consider some of the most intellent I know. If someone
> else tries to persuade me with their argument, it's nearly impossible.
> I've had a psychologist (my parents divorced recently =( ) tell me that
> same thing.
In my real life, I respect about six people. My family contains one
of those six, and neither of my parents rank among them. I don't
like many other people for many other reasons. I guess I'm just
antisocial, hence the email address bluecalx@antisocial.com.
It doesn't really bother me, though, as much as most people would
think.
But I digress. Read below.
> Within ACZ, at least, we're able to freely share thoughts and ideas and
> remain open-minded. When others tell me they dislike libraries, I can
> explain why I DO like them and ask why they do not. And after several
> hundred messages back and forth (86 in one day =),
We get a lot on the staff list, too :-)
I can see others'
> reasoning -- and they've provided some sensible reasoning for the
> opposing viewpoint. So much, in fact, that I have to agree. For the
> most part, the only other place I've ever seen someone who can change my
> views like that is on Slashdot - and you can't find a public place with
> more intelligent debates than that.
I'd really like to know what the average IQ of the ticalc.org staff is.
I'd say it's quite high. We try to hire staff members that can partake in
the intelligent discussions we get involved in. I've talked on the phone
with Andy, Phil, Eric and Nathan several times in the past few weeks and I
hope to continue doing so in the future. We get a lot done and usually,
with many intelligent people in the group, all sides are heard and WHY
everyone thinks that way. This is a Good Thing(TM).
> The point is, this whole group structure that we follow is completely
> dependent upon the "natural leadership" and "unanimous decisions" that
> David was talking about. And yes, I think that the personality that I
> and others gauge from conversations with others (via email and ICQ) is a
> very important when we're pondering new members - not only must one be a
> good programmer, but they must be open-minded and group oriented. I
> think that our problem right now is that we haven't been working
> together as a group on much at all so far.
I think the major fault with David's point is the fact that neither he nor
Bryan knows how ticalc.org operates anymore. There's no more coordinators
list. The power of the coords has been reduced drastically and OUR [i.e.
the people who aren't coords] OPINIONS ARE VALUED. No matter what anyone
else says, there's nobody that can attest to how we work better than the
staff themselves. I can honestly say that the only thing I can find
displeasurable with working on ticalc.org is all this bullshit that's
still going on with Bryan vs. ticalc.org vs. the rest of the world. To
make a long point short, I love ticalc.org. I love my job. The atmosphere
on the staff list and on the phone is friendly and open. Things get done
and very little arguing occurs. Sure, we run into a snafu or two (or three
or four :)) along the way, but we deal with them and move on.
Things have changed.
> Remember, be VERY careful who you give responsibility and power to.
> Make sure that it's someone you can get along with and who is condusive
> to working openly in a group. It seems to me to be becoming more
> obvious by the day that Bryan is and never was suitable for such
> responsibilities. I'd rather give the responsibility to someone who may
> not be the hardest worker, but has the proper personality, than to
> someone who works extremely hard but is not mature enough to control his
> or her self.
As I see it, power has evened out across the staff a great deal even
since
my hiring. The entire staff has been very nice towards me and
they've even
accepted many of my ideas (fake news, download stats, me/Kirk's
featured
programs). It's not a question of imbalance of power because the
power the
coords wield is purely ceremonial at the moment. As I see it, my
opinions
are valued with just as much esteem as the next staff member's.
And that's
what counts.
Time for Chemistry homework..... mmm, osmotic balance........
--
Nick Disabato <nickd@ticalc.org> ICQ: 41168463
Screenshots, File Archives, News, Landscaping
the ticalc.org project - http://www.ticalc.org/
Follow-Ups: