Rotative Council Members

[stefanhendriks]

rofl.

I will try to explain, in very simple matter, and reflecting it in BU terms..

There are 2 'council member groups'.

1 who can make up rules and have to agree to a certain extent (like we do now).
1 group who has to agree with this as well.

So, roughly translated, you can do it like this:

there is the council group like us now. Group 1
a new group will be formed, rotated members...

the 2nd group can make up rules, suggestions. THey agree on this, the 1st group will verify and when that is done, the rule is accepted.

So basicly we (the 1st group, meaning the current council members) do not have to be as active as before, but we let the community 'decide' and 'make up' rules, etc. When the 'community group' agrees on a rule, they pass it to us, and we either agree on it or not.

This is not how the dutch politics work though, not entirely, but its somewhat alike.

The question is, do we need such a thing like this?

For instance, personally i'd like to be more involved in the community, then to hear from a second group what the community decided. Ofcourse, i should stay involved in a system like this, because else i can't make a good decision about rules that have undergone several discussions already by the active community.

[TruB]

i vote no..

[Pierre-Marie Baty]

Err Stefan, I think your system is overcomplicated... and unfair. Unfair because in the end we (the second council) can veto anything we want, so in the end the first council ought to provide us with only suggestions they believe we might like. Overcomplicated because in the end, the final work will remain our task, the only burden we'll be lifted of will be of having the few ideas from time to time that keep Bots United rolling. We'll still do everything but having the ideas. I mean...

I prefer $eu's suggestion.

[stefanhendriks]

yes, the system is very simplified. Our dutch politics work a bit different. Ofcourse the 1st group can overrule, but that would be odd on our politics because the 1st group has members of the same party as the 2nd group. Anyhow, i will not try to explain that.

Would this suggestion of $eu mean the council members will be 'rotative' ? Or will it mean 2 extra members can be council members and be rotative?

[KWo]

And what this function as rotative council member should fix / make more helpfull and better in management at this forum? Let me say something.

This forum - as I got it correct - should help the people (bot users) in solving problems with bots and should also focus and share all bots ideas created by bots developers (to help developers). Changing the administrative system of the forum will not increase the efficiency of the help the forum is supposed to do but it will be only "the art for the art".
Talking about the possibility of replacing some of councils may start their thinking someone isn't satisfied by the work some of them - so it may be untactful at least. But if some of them want to say - "Sorry - I don't have time to make all work of council - please - replace me" - then - yes - we can discuss again about it, but only because we need to make true some conditions about the government of this forum. Otherwise I don't see any reason to change the current system here.
But it's common on this forum - the people are focusing much more on offtopic threads than on bots and on bot coding. Maybe someone could open the topic "how to write some intelligent installer to make bot installation more easy for the beginner user" instead talking about "how to change something in the management of this forum" ?
Guys - try to focus on efficiency of this forum - go to code bots and help the people.

[stefanhendriks]

i smell EUish stuff here We are drifting away from the community!

[@$3.1415rin]

i smell paranoia

[von Ryan]

Originally Posted by KWo

And what this function as rotative council member should fix / make more helpfull and better in management at this forum? Let me say something.

This forum - as I got it correct - should help the people (bot users) in solving problems with bots and should also focus and share all bots ideas created by bots developers (to help developers). Changing the administrative system of the forum will not increase the efficiency of the help the forum is supposed to do but it will be only "the art for the art".
Talking about the possibility of replacing some of councils may start their thinking someone isn't satisfied by the work some of them - so it may be untactful at least. But if some of them want to say - "Sorry - I don't have time to make all work of council - please - replace me" - then - yes - we can discuss again about it, but only because we need to make true some conditions about the government of this forum. Otherwise I don't see any reason to change the current system here.
But it's common on this forum - the people are focusing much more on offtopic threads than on bots and on bot coding. Maybe someone could open the topic "how to write some intelligent installer to make bot installation more easy for the beginner user" instead talking about "how to change something in the management of this forum" ?
Guys - try to focus on efficiency of this forum - go to code bots and help the people.

You know, in the end I agree with KWo... Guess I was just brainstorming... I dunno, I have a lot of weird ideas...