maemo.org - Talk
Page 2 of 12 1 2 34 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)
-   Community (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Moderators (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=28675)

SD69 2009-05-01 21:59
Re: Moderators
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by qgil (Post 283741)
Someone said that those people should be actively invited... mmm... perhaps, but a good moderator is expected to be active and have own initiative isn't it? ;) Besides, becoming a moderator is not some kind of condecoration. First you want to work on a task or a role. Then you realize you need moderator permissions for that. The other way around is known not to work in forums.
That was me. I agree that a moderator has to be active and have initiative, and if someone has to be persuaded to be a moderator, then it probably won't work well. But I believe that if people were invited, and in particular, knew that they were equally accepted even though they come into it from the itt side rather than from maemo.org, a few might accept and be good mods.

Jaffa 2009-05-01 22:02
Re: Moderators
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD69 (Post 283756)
equally accepted even though they come into it from the itt side rather than from maemo.org
Can you explain, please, what the "itt" and "maemo.org" sides are? I honestly, truly, don't understand.

Is your concern that someone who has an active maemo.org account would be given moderator privileges on the forum, despite having not been active here? Or is your concern that someone who is active, helpful and constructive here would be rejected as a moderator if they didn't have an active maemo.org account?

To me, maemo.org accounts and ITT accounts are just two logins to different spaces for the same community. Some members of that community I only converse with here, some I only chat with on IRC, some on the mailing lists, some on Bugzilla.

SD69 2009-05-01 22:18
Re: Moderators
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaffa (Post 283759)
Can you explain, please, what the "itt" and "maemo.org" sides are? I honestly, truly, don't understand.

Is your concern that someone who has an active maemo.org account would be given moderator privileges on the forum, despite having not been active here? Or is your concern that someone who is active, helpful and constructive here would be rejected as a moderator if they didn't have an active maemo.org account?
I am referring to this post, where Reggie described itt and maemo.org as two formerly autonomous sites AND you thanked him for the post less than two hours ago!

http://www.internettablettalk.com/fo...1&postcount=65

Is the term "sides" not consistent with "closing the gap between two formerly autonomous sites"? I honestly, truly, think that sometimes you agree with or question a statement depending entirely on who makes it.

My concern is that people who have demonstrated an interest by actively contributing to the itt forum and who would be good mods are reluctant to ask to be a moderator.

Has anyone here ever been involved in a merger? Do you not see that there is an advantage to the resulting entity having some continuing contribution from each one of the two formerly autonomous sides instead of all of the people being from one of the two previously existing entities?

Jaffa 2009-05-01 22:25
Re: Moderators
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD69 (Post 283765)
Is the term "sides" not consistent with "closing the gap between two formerly autonomous sites"?
The term "sides" is what I don't understand. And no, it's not who I read "two formerly autonomous sites": just because two sites were running independently in terms of sponsorship/responsibility/theme/user accounts doesn't mean there isn't a massive overlap between the people very active on one site and very active on another.

"Sides" suggests conflict. It's an emotive word, and yet you're surprised when it provokes emotive reactions.

Quote:
Has anyone here ever been involved in a merger? Do you not see that there is an advantage to the resulting entity having some continuing contribution from each one of the two formerly autonomous sides instead of all of the people being from one of the two previously existing entities?
You're constructing strawmen. My point is, quite clearly, that the people who are moderators - the people who volunteered to be moderators - are people who are some of the most prolific, helpful and patient people on this forum. Who volunteered - even before the t.m.o move was announced - who wasn't also active on maemo.org?

The reason I don't understand "sides" is because it suggests that because someone is active "here", they can't be active "there". Or that someone active "here" is less important or involved than someone active "there".

Perhaps I'm too active on both "sides" to see a blinding obvious chasm.

SD69 2009-05-01 22:26
Re: Moderators
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by qgil (Post 283750)

What about you (yes, you) going through this, this and this page, sending a private email linking to this discussion to whoever you feel like proposing to become a moderator?

This move will probably be more helpful towards our common objectives than having the usual suspects pressing the Reply button and exchanging Thanks in yet another thread.
Maybe you missed it - I said I would send the emails. I agree for the reasons mentioned in post #2, that there should be consensus on objective criteria and we should stay away from subjective criteria of who I or anyone else feel like proposing. (For the record, I don't feel like proposing anyone.)

Jaffa 2009-05-01 22:29
Re: Moderators
 
I was going to (very incorrectly) point out you hadn't responded to the actual point of my post. But you did:

Quote:
Originally Posted by SD69 (Post 283765)
My concern is that people who have demonstrated an interest by actively contributing to the itt forum and who would be good mods are reluctant to ask to be a moderator.
Who is this silent crowd who are now so terrified of volunteering to be a moderator, despite being active here since ITT started in mid-2005?

If your concern is that there may be people who feel like this (and, this is what you seem to be saying); wouldn't we be better letting them speak for themselves? Being too shy to stand up with their arms open is hardly a good quality in a wannabe-moderator.

SD69 2009-05-01 22:39
Re: Moderators
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaffa (Post 283766)
The term "sides" is what I don't understand. And no, it's not who I read "two formerly autonomous sites": just because two sites were running independently in terms of sponsorship/responsibility/theme/user accounts doesn't mean there isn't a massive overlap between the people very active on one site and very active on another.

"Sides" suggests conflict. It's an emotive word, and yet you're surprised when it provokes emotive reactions.



You're constructing strawmen. My point is, quite clearly, that the people who are moderators - the people who volunteered to be moderators - are people who are some of the most prolific, helpful and patient people on this forum. Who volunteered - even before the t.m.o move was announced - who wasn't also active on maemo.org?

The reason I don't understand "sides" is because it suggests that because someone is active "here", they can't be active "there". Or that someone active "here" is less important or involved than someone active "there".

Perhaps I'm too active on both "sides" to see a blinding obvious chasm.
Ahh, I didn't mean sides as to conflict; I meant it as in pre-merger and we do agree on that. There is a large amount of overlap between "here" and "there" - fair enough.

SD69 2009-05-01 23:01
Re: Moderators
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaffa (Post 283768)
Who is this silent crowd who are now so terrified of volunteering to be a moderator, despite being active here since ITT started in mid-2005?

If your concern is that there may be people who feel like this (and, this is what you seem to be saying); wouldn't we be better letting them speak for themselves? Being too shy to stand up with their arms open is hardly a good quality in a wannabe-moderator.
I didn't say "terrified" or "shy". And my proposal was that talk.maemo.org would be better off if it made an effort and reached out and invited people, even those people who are critical as qgil described it.

Can we now get back to answering the questions that qgil asked (although perhaps only reggie can answer the question if anyone has been rejected)? Also, any thoughts as to number of posts/thanks criteria?

Jaffa 2009-05-01 23:06
Re: Moderators
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD69 (Post 283785)
Also, any thoughts as to number of posts/thanks criteria?
I think qole suggested some earlier - but my ISP is about to undertake "short notice urgent maintenance work", so I doubt I'll be able to find it.

I definitely remember reading someone suggest a >1 thanks/post ratio for something. (Finally, an incentive to not merge aflegg ;-))

A "posts per day" criteria seems relevant - but it should certainly be time-limited, which the current raw value isn't.

TrueJournals 2009-05-02 04:44
Re: Moderators
 
I've kept a bit quiet on the whole moderators front, but I would be interested in helping out moderate, at least in the developers and applications forums, if help is needed. Although, I'm not sure I meet any "requirements" thought up here :p Just looking to get a bit more involved :)


All times are GMT. The time now is 15:54.
Page 2 of 12 1 2 34 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

vBulletin® Version 3.8.8