SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
This is a summary report from the Friday, September 8th, 2023 20:30UTC meeting of the SoylentNews governance committee.
There is an IRC log available of the meeting itself from the #governance channel of SoylentNews IRC. For technical reasons, the link -- https://logs.sylnt.us/%23governance/2023-08-25.html -- can't be made clickable here. Within the IRC log, the meeting begins at 20:37:27 according to the timestamp. There was talk in the #meeting-discuss channel related to the meeting -- https://logs.sylnt.us/%23meeting-discuss/2023-08-25.html -- also available in the IRC logs.
Discussion is summarized with the minutes; for full discussion and details please refer to the chat logs.
The meeting was Chaired by Deucalion (apologies had been received from cmn32480), and called for a show of those present at 2030 UTC. Apologies had been received in advance from cmn33480, requerdanos, audioguy, and mechanicjay. Present were Deucalion, kolie, FNord666, and janrinok. As this would not constitute a quorum it was decided to wait for 30 minutes to see if anyone else arrived.
No agenda had been published, but there were outstanding actions on mechanicjay and from the board (requested via kolie).
There was some relevant but informal discussion on a few issues but no decisions nor proposals made as a quorum had not yet been formed.
The meeting was called to order again at 2207 UTC but there were still insufficient committee members present to form a quorum.
The timing of the next meeting was decided for 2030 UTC on 15 Sep 2023.
The meeting was adjourned at 2113 UTC.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Reziac on Wednesday September 13 2023, @07:23PM
... for doing this. Even if "nothing happened" it's good to see what didn't happen. :)
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 13 2023, @08:48PM (28 children)
In a previous discussion, I submitted a framework for SN's governance going forward. You can read it here [soylentnews.org]. I support letting the community (including staff) have full control over the composition of the board. It means there's no minimum or maximum number of staff who can serve. This has been a sticking point in other discussions. Realistically, I believe the community will certainly vote for a few staff to serve on the board, so they haven't been excluded.
There needs to be a clear understanding of the board's purpose and power. I know that staff are opposed to the board setting deadlines and insisting that tasks be completed by a certain time. I understand this, because staff are volunteers and may not have the time to meet board deadlines. However, if staff can altogether ignore goals set by the board, then the board is nothing more than an advisory board. I don't think community members are going to be as interested in serving on a board that has no real power. In my opinion, there needs to be a middle ground where the board has real power but with limitations. Read the link for specifics.
I suggest that the board should be able to set goals and choose the leaders from among the active staff for each of the three teams. As long as the team leaders are making a good faith effort to make progress toward the board's goals, and there's no disqualifying misconduct like clear abuse of power, the board shouldn't remove a team leader. Basically, team leaders can be removed by the board, but only with cause.
When a team leader needs to be chosen, I propose that the active staff nominate one of their members to serve as an interim team leader. The board should then meet as soon as possible to confirm or reject the appointment, with a simple majority vote needed for approval. If the board rejects a nominee, the staff will need to choose someone else who hasn't already been rejected to serve on an interim basis until the board can meet again. The staff can nominate who they think is best qualified, but the board has to approve it to make the team leader permanent.
I think it's a good balance of power. The board still has full authority to set goals for SN, and then it's the responsibility of the team leaders to make progress toward those goals. As long as the team leaders are reasonably trying to make progress toward those goals and aren't otherwise acting improperly, the board can't remove the team leader. The board doesn't meddle in the day to day operations of the site, but they have power over the direction of SN.
I know the amount of power given to the board has been a sticking point, and this seems like a good compromise.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by janrinok on Thursday September 14 2023, @09:13AM (27 children)
Thank you for your comments and, as usual, some very thought-provoking replies.
Firstly, let me clarify a few things. We are not opposed to having a board, in fact it appears that it is absolutely essential in order that we can collect subscriptions legally and without being taxed by the IRS.
The current problem arose because of the power that 2 board members have and their abuse - in our opinion - of that power. The end result is that they were prepared to shut the site down. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by creating another board which has the same potential faults built into the same bylaws. While we are grateful for the suggestions and assistance from separatrix, each time we have tried to rewrite the bylaws we keep being told that we must cede all control to a board that has the ability to act in any way that it wishes without further consultation. Claiming that it would not do so is simply repeating what the stakeholders promised us over 9 years ago. The bylaws that seem acceptable to many businesses simply do not give us the ability to run this site the way that the community wishes us to. Separatrix is adamant that any staff serving on the board is a conflict of interest and therefore should not be permitted.
Secondly some are portraying this as a staff versus community battle. That is simply not the case. The staff have ALWAYS been subject to the will of the community and it has consulted with them on many issues. The community can already contact the staff by many different means, both public and private, to raise issues and to suggest changes. We are also keen to increase that communication wherever we can, and as such that can include members of the community serving as representatives of the community as a whole and being part of the management structure. I do NOT want to see any community involvement being viewed as advisory but that cannot mean that every community request can be implemented without knowing the full implications of that change.
Thirdly, with each change of bylaws another problem has been seen. Each new proposal took away more of the management for which the current staff have been responsible and gave it to as yet unidentified people who need not even have an account on this site. That appears to us to be a move to facilitate a take-over at some point in the future. Our attempts to change bylaws to specifically prevent this were rejected. It was further exacerbated by the staff being told that, while everyone else in the community must be represented, the staff themselves should have NO representation at all as they were simply 'serving the community'. As we see it, everyone (including the board) is serving the community so why we should be singled out and told that we would not have representation is at best puzzling.
I agree entirely with your proposals and I would imagine that most if not all of the staff would agree too - but I am not speaking on their behalf in this comment.
The problem of being tasked with jobs and then expected to complete them in a certain timeframe ignores the very practical problems that we face. If the board demands a rewrite or major changes to rehash then who will do that work? Without Perl programmers then it is an impossible task. We have identified potential Perl programmers from among the community but we have suggested that they do not join the staff until we know in which direction the site is going. Furthermore, allocating tasks without knowing what is possible in terms of manpower, resources or even if it is possible is fraught with problems. These would be problems for which the staff would be held responsible even though we had not been consulted about the practical issues before hand (remember - no representation at all!).
Our solution is to create an administrative body which would replace the board. It would be responsible for producing and maintaining management and policy documents, providing a legal framework for the site (the new 'board' if you like), financial management and a secretariat. This site as always depended on discussion, cooperation and agreement in choosing the way forward - personally I can see no reason why that cannot continue in the future. No group has to have an ultimate power over any other group, while each group has specific responsibilities.
The community have important roles to play in several areas of the new management structure. Whether we will have sufficient volunteers from the community to fill all of the potential seats is yet to be seen.
will
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 15 2023, @06:38AM (26 children)
I think that you are missing the point of separatrix and other people that object to the "oligarchy," as he put it. The problem isn't that staff are on the board, it is that staff are "more equal than others." It is that despite claiming that SN is by and for the community, staff has special rules giving them the majority seats on the majority of ruling bodies, almost no legal responsibility for that ruling ability, and full indemnity for what little liability they have. Instead the "community" gets
52 seats maximum out of a board of unbounded size. You complain about the board subjecting the community to abuse of power, but then set yourself up to be that abuser with a similar lack of recourse.Which makes the next part even more ironic. You complain about it this being portrayed as a staff versus community battle, but then fail to realize that your justifications are equally the case with a community-led board. Additionally, the staff gets to vote for representatives as community members if they meet the class definitions as any other person (and I'd argue they would also be eligible as candidates because separatrix misunderstands his own metaphor). And its not like the staff are slaves. If the community-voted board is full of dullards or miscreants, and they demand you do something you don't want to do or cannot do, you can say "no." You've done it multiple times before and you can do it again. But the fact that seems to be your envisioned impending outcome is itself revealing that you are the one seeing the community versus staff battle.
From my perspective, what this appears as is the staff were perfectly content will all of the power and none of the responsibility, legal or otherwise, and are trying to restore the status quo. Trying to create a structure that preserves their power while eschewing anything that puts the responsibility on themselves. Defending that with imagined situations of a community of interlopers predominantly made up of those who are too stupid or too malicious to understand things on the same level you can. Painting themselves as slaves chained in the basement of cruel tyrants above all reproach.
If you want to claim to be a social media service by and for the community, then it stands to reason that the members of the community are the ones with the ultimate authority. Even your base design of "separate but equal" management bodies reeks of "all community members are equal, but some are more equal than others." No wonder you complain about people portraying this as a staff versus community battle. Your whole comment and many from other staff drip with the same conceit and that harbingers the prophecy you are claiming to fear may turnout to be self-fulfilling.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday September 15 2023, @07:31AM (13 children)
The entire board with the exception of any staff (of which there will only be 2 people) are elected from the community. The President, (and Dep President?), Secretary, Accountant, and 5 community representatives can all be elected from the the community. The staff are quite content not to be on the board itself, but they do want to have their voices heard. But with 'no representation' then they simply will not have any input into the board's decisions. There is nothing to ensure that the community members who are elected have any idea of how the site actually works. How then can they make intelligent decisions on how things should be changed?
My fear is that the board will simply give instructions to the staff who might then be responsible for achieving the impossible. They cannot hope to implement certain tasks without the appropriate staff being available and the task itself being possible. To overcome this we suggested several alternatives in turn to ensure that the tried and tested method of consultation, discussion and agreement, was used. They have each been rejected out of hand.
Members of staff are active on this site every single day. The board is not. The staff is responsible to the board for ensuring that pornography and spamming are controlled as quickly as possible and that the necessary legal reporting actions are taken. It is responsible for ensuring that there is no moderation abuse taking place, nor any other kind of abuse for that matter, and for this they need access to the database and the management displays. This information is not available to the board. The board plan, at best, to meet monthly and they will not have access to the private and personal data that we have to protect. The only people who can do this task are the staff.
I would welcome the board's general direction but they do not have the information available to them to manage the day-to-day operation of the site. They do not know that, as of today, one member of staff is just leaving hospital after a major operation, another is about to be working away from home for a period of time, and we have apologies from 3 members of staff who are unavailable to attend today's Governance Meeting because of work commitments. These are all things that need managing in real-time, every day.
To enable the staff to meet their responsibilities on the site we have a set of policy documents which we must follow, and we have been given the necessary authority by the board and the access to carry out the tasks that we need to perform. If you feel that the policy documents are not suitable then they should be changed. That is, even today, a board responsibility. If you feel that the staff have too much authority then please suggest a way that we can do the job expected of us without the access to the database and the management screens.
I was appointed by the board as the Day Manager of this site on 1 Jan 2023. Nobody else wanted the job. The actions that I take to control sock puppets, banned accounts and abuse are NOT as a result of my reponsibilities as an editor - but as the Day Manager of the site. Nobody stepped forward to take on that role, even when I stood down from it several months ago. I was asked to continue running the software and managing the site again. I am also an active editor - but I am not the Editor-in-Chief.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 15 2023, @08:25AM (12 children)
Who says the staff has "no representation?" I guess you all don't consider yourselves part of the community. The proposed model so far is that SN uses a membership vote. If the staff members also meet membership requirements, then they are also members. By complaining, repeatedly, about the apparent representation, it is the staff who keep painting themselves as separate from the community.
And we both know (at least I hope you know) that while the staff has taken up many jobs, they are hardly "responsible" for their failure to execute. Spam, CSAM, failure to pay taxes, failure to pay bills, and all that won't have the state banging down your door. Well, maybe they might come after you specifically since you apparently signed something formally accepting responsibility and liability as "Day Manager." But even still, they will ignore the rest of the volunteer staff because while they may be "responsible" they are not responsible. Instead, that sword will fall on the neck of the corporation itself and its board.
Sometimes I wonder if you even know how corporate bodies work. Do you imagine Reid Hoffman, Charles Scharf, Sandra Peterson, and Emma Walmsley running around the various campuses trying to run the day-to-day business of Microsoft?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 15 2023, @09:48AM (2 children)
Um, who, then, is the Editor-in-chief these days? Is anyone in charge down there?
(Score: 3, Touché) by janrinok on Friday September 15 2023, @10:24AM (1 child)
You may not have noticed but we are mostly involved with rewriting bylaws, trying to organise meetings about bylaws, managing the site, keeping the story queues full - and trying to lead normal lives with jobs, families, medical issues etc too.
How many submissions have you made to help out? What is your contribution to the discussions? How many bylaws have you edited?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2023, @06:49AM
Oh, I contributed a lot! But like separatrix, all my suggestions were rejected by some "active staff" who knows better than me, a certain "janrinok"? So, I quit.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday September 15 2023, @10:19AM (8 children)
separatrix said exactly that in his last email to me regarding his suggested bylaws. We didn't need representation as we were 'serving the community".
Aren't we all serving the community?
Who do you hold responsible when you fail to do something that is your job? We accept responsibility for doing the jobs that we do on behalf of the board. True, it is the board that will need to account for what has happened, but as the board has not actually been active since around 2020 until May (with their declaration of site closure) of this year I am not too optimistic of them doing anything to keep the site going, are you?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 15 2023, @10:45AM (7 children)
So separatrix speaks for everyone via email and his decree indomitable. Got it.
I also apologize for not realizing that you are all slaves in a basement bearing full legal responsibility for the site’s activities and always and for all time owe a duty to execute such and act in the best interest of the site as employees of the same.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday September 15 2023, @11:12AM (6 children)
No, we didn't accept separatrix's suggestions. Nevertheless, we are grateful for the help and advice he provided. We are now exploring other avenues.
Your sarcasm aside, it seems you do not put much store in giving your word that you will do something. Fortunately, you are in the minority. The site is staffed by people who do what they can, when they can, and can be trusted to do what they say. Being volunteers doesn't imply that people cannot be trusted.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 15 2023, @10:16PM (4 children)
If you don't accept them and are already looking at alternatives, then why are you repeatedly bitching about them as if they were some sort of law?
And to the contrary to your second point, I understand the difference between volunteering to do something, being paid to do something, being a fiduciary, and the concept of knowing where the buck stops. I also understand that life can and does happen and who the bagholder really is when the devil comes knocking.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday September 16 2023, @02:24AM (3 children)
Because they keep being submitted under the guise of different templates yet all failing to address the problems that we have actually experienced. The stakeholders took an action that was contrary to the wishes of the community i.e. to close the site down. The staff have written draft bylaws to prevent this happening in the future but they are being rejected.
And because of this we have made very little progress in writing the bylaws that are needed to prevent the same problems being repeated in the future. Instead, the staff are being criticised as though they are the cause of our current woes. They are not. They have kept this site operational for over 9 years even when the stakeholders became bored and disillusioned which resulted in one of them resigning to cycle across America in 2020.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2023, @05:59AM (2 children)
The fact that you repeatedly fail to see the parallels between what you are claiming to wish to prevent and what you keep proposing that is "being rejected" as seen by a number in the community would be flabbergasting if it weren't for the fact you've made quite clear you think you are better than the rest. But sure, feel free to keep bringing up other people's proposals and how they are unfair in a completely unrelated thread because it makes you feel better.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday September 16 2023, @06:24AM (1 child)
And therein lies the rub. The problem is not being addressed by the bylaws that are being suggested by anyone other than the staff. The fact that most objections that we are seeing are from a few ACs who refuse to use their existing accounts does not make it the majority opinion. We have managed the site since it began as well you know - your own account can verify that. The problems occured when the board stop following the rules that had been agreed in 2014. This is not the result of any action by the staff since that time.
We are not better than the rest of the community. We came from the community and remain part of it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2023, @09:49AM
I didn’t say it was a majority. I was just pointing out that it exists in more than one individual. If you really do see yourselves as part of the community then there is no problem, which I’ve repeatedly said. But then again, I am also not the one repeatedly setting the staff apart from the community. Maybe if you attempted to see the parallel from the perspective of a community member instead of as the former defacto leader deposed by the dejure despots, you’d see that maybe their suggestions do attempt to fix the problem from their perspective while the staff’s suggestions they’ve seen on the site have not, or may even be worse in some respects.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2023, @06:52AM
On SoylentNews, sarcasm is never "aside"; it is the main dish. If we have learned nothing else from aristarchus, we best learn this: sarcasm is the lethal enemy of PHBs and RWNJs. They cannot handle ambiguity, and indeterminancy, which is why the insist on Rules! and two genders, and guns, lots of guns.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Friday September 15 2023, @08:16PM (11 children)
IMHO, staff should have more say. And I'll explain (again) why I think so.
As I've noted before, the volunteer staff prove their commitment to the site every. single. day.
If not for those volunteers giving up their time and energy to edit and publish submissions, make sure the site's multiple systems are up and running, address issues with spam and abuse and a variety of other tasks, there would be no Soylent News.
Through their efforts, you have a place where you can mouth off and claim you're being oppressed by an "oligarchy," without being silenced, retaliated against or otherwise inconvenienced in any way.
I'll repeat myself. These unpaid volunteers demonstrate their commitment to the site and its continuing operations every day.
As such, their demonstrated commitment makes them the most appropriate to lead here. And guess what? If you want to make such a commitment of time and energy, you too can be "staff."
All you have to do is ask, because there aren't enough volunteers making such a commitment. If you did, and followed through, you'd show yourself to be worthy of a leadership position here too.
What better criteria could there be to identify those who think the site is important and want it to continue to operate into the future? I can't think of any myself, so please do enlighten me.
I'd also point out that I haven't volunteered here in quite a while, which while it doesn't mean I don't care about the continuing operation of Soylent News or that I want the site to fail, it does mean that I (and you) haven't demonstrated the level of commitment as that of those who actually make this site go and keep it running.
Those who do should have more say than we do, IMNSHO.
That doesn't mean that other members of the community (and the volunteers who make up the "staff" are absolutely members of the community as well) shouldn't have a say as well. We definitely should.
But blathering on about "oligarchies" and bad-mouthing the folks who make it possible for you to do so (without giving you the same in return) isn't helpful. Quite the opposite in fact.
Want to make things better? Stop the personal attacks and do something constructive.
And you too can be part of the "oligarchy" if you want. All you have to do is demonstrate the same level of commitment as those who keep this site running for you, for free, without any expectation of reward other than providing you with the ability to say what you want -- even if it's bad-mouthing those same unpaid volunteers.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 15 2023, @10:20PM (6 children)
Funny, everyone I know of, who volunteered to be an editor, and who might have corrected the well-known rightwing bias of SoylentNews, did not make it past the "training". Seeing what happened to them, I have been disinclined to contribute.
And whining like this kind of puts me off.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday September 16 2023, @06:44AM (5 children)
Please name those who you think failed during training. I cannot think of any, but I may have overlooked someone. I would view a failure during training as much a failure of the trainer as it was for the trainee. We do not set a time limit on how much training people need before being considered as 'qualified'. Some may have realised during training that there is more to the role than they first thought and decided not to continue. It is their right to do so.
There have been many who have worked as an editor for a while and then stood down. That is also entirely normal and to be expected.
You have made a claim and I assume that you believed that it would just be accepted. Well, no, it won't.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2023, @06:54AM (2 children)
NotSanguine. He confessed as much. He would have made a good editor, and stemmed the tide of alt-right disinformation.
(Score: 3, Informative) by NotSanguine on Sunday September 17 2023, @03:50AM (1 child)
IIRC, I was an editor for almost a year. But I wasn't able to dedicate the time required to do a good job, so I stopped. Which is what I said [soylentnews.org]:
If editing for almost a year is "failure," how do you define "success?"
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 3, Interesting) by janrinok on Sunday September 17 2023, @05:34AM
I was tempted to reply saying much the same thing yesterday - I am very glad that I did not!
The people spreading the misinformation on this site seem to ignore the facts that are staring them in the face. They make false claims, which they know to be false, and hope that the community will simply swallow them up which in a few cases they do.
NotSanguine did indeed do a good stint as an editor and it is much appreciated to this day. A year of editing is not a trivial contribution to the site.
When did Azuma Hazuki begin her training? I don't think that she did, but I will happily be corrected on that. There is no record of her ever being given the seclev necessary to carry out editing duties, even on the development system where all training takes place. I agree that she is intelligent enough to cope with it and barely pause for breath. There was a lot of community kick-back about the suggestion though which anyone can read in the IRC logs. The idea appears to have gone no further. Unless she contacted the Administration and asked to be considered for an editing role the training never even started. People cannot be 'volunteered' by other community members.
Personally, I think she would have made a very good editor providing that she followed the same Terms of Reference that every other editor has to follow. Incidentaly, those ToRs make it quite clear that the site is apolitical. But, if my memory serves me well, she was also undergoing futher training for her professional life and would probably have been unlikely to be able to give the time needed to complete the editor training simultaneously. However, my memory might not be 100% on these details.
Azuma is perfectly capable of defending herself on this site - and I hope that she continues to do so. Her comments are often thought provoking. Others think so too. She has received quite a few gift subscriptions granted to her by other community members.
However, she cannot have been rejected during training if she never began training. Still, that does not sound as good as the narrative that the AC is pushing, so he simply states something that he knows to be false.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2023, @07:00AM (1 child)
AzumaHazuki, for another. I remember when she volunteered. Did not work out. Not sure why, but SN would be a much better place with her as an editor. Seriously.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Sunday September 17 2023, @09:51AM
ISTR the same. I definitely remember discussing it with her on IRC.
But I think janrinok may be correct about why she didn't continue on that pat, as IIRC she had a lot going on in her life at that time.
Perhaps she could clarify this for us. But she hasn't posted comments since 18 July, so I guess she hasn't been around lately. I hope she comes back.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 15 2023, @10:37PM
Then don't claim you are a website by and for the community. It's that simple. I'm not the one separating the staff from the community, they are by insisting they are more equal. Repeatedly painting the community as full of idiots or worse that will subjugate them to their will. Just admit that they see SoylentNews as the staff's playground that they invite everyone else to at their leisure. Otherwise, there is no problem.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 15 2023, @11:18PM (2 children)
I just want to say that as the OP (dalek), I only posted two comments so far in this journal:
1) https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=57617&page=1&cid=1324504#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]
2) https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=57617&page=1&cid=1324505#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]
I am pointing this out to distance myself from some of the other AC comments that have been posted in these threads. It's not always easy to distinguish ACs, so I want to explicitly do so here. I'm not comfortable with some of what they're posting.
Anyway, I believe the proposals I've posted do give staff a greater level of influence over the direction of the site. Are there any parts that you disagree with, in regard to the role of staff?
I also want to point out that SN didn't have a properly functioning board for several years, and that the dysfunction of the board led to the decision to shut down SN. That decision has since been reversed, but it probably would have never occurred at all if SN had a functioning board the entire time. Even though it's likely that not all of the board members will also be staff members, anyone who is serving on the board is also demonstrating a commitment to the site. We've seen the damage that a dysfunctional board can cause. While serving on the board is different from the role of a staff member, their role is still important. Even among staff members, not everyone is able to dedicate the same amount of time to the site. They're volunteers, but they have to prioritize other things in their lives like their families, jobs, and health.
My point is that you should be careful in trying to measure the differences in contributions by different people. I think it's fair to say that staff members, because of their continuous involvement with the operation of the site, have a better idea than ordinary users would of how the site works, technical issues, and what's required to keep the site up and running. That really should be obvious, and so the opinions of staff members on those matters certainly should carry greater weight. I think a lot of community members implicitly give greater weight to the opinions of staff members, understanding that they have more familiarity with the operation of the site. I have no problem with this at all. Likewise, I'm supportive of staff members serving on the board, which I believe differs from some of the other proposals that have been posted.
I'm just uncomfortable with weighing the relative contributions to the site from different people. It would be like saying that a person who subscribed more often or for a larger amount of money is more committed to SN. The difference in monetary contributions might just be due to the financial circumstances of the members of the site. For some people, contributing $100 twice a year might be easy, while another person who is living on a fixed income might only be able to subscribe for $20/year.
I understand the point you're trying to make, but I caution you to please be careful with how you're saying it.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2023, @06:57AM
My AC postings are always mine, and no one else's! All you have to is ask, and I will tell you. But, since we are all banned from the front page and polite company, I hardly see the point of the courtesy. Good day to you, Sir!
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Sunday September 17 2023, @03:43AM
Sorry for the delay in responding. I wasn't available to post this yesterday.
I couldn't agree more. In fact, I wish I'd written what you just did instead of what I did.
The community needs to be at least okay with a new board and new bylaws. And it's clear that the Governance Committee recognizes that by holding their meetings publicly. Anyone who wants to comment, propose ideas and/or ask questions can do so in these journals.
And that includes input on the size, composition and scope of responsibilities of the board.
What's more, it seems to me that everyone involved is working toward the same goal. Unfortunately, there's been a bunch of friction (some of which I touched on here [soylentnews.org] a few weeks ago) which, it seems, has slowed things down.
I mean, heck you're not even logging in any more. I figured it was you dalek. I still don't get that, but that's not my business so you do you.
Regardless, I think we can get to a consensus. But it does no one any good to point fingers. Rather, it just hampers collaboration and slows the process.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 13 2023, @08:57PM (2 children)
Thank you for allowing anonymous comments in this journal. Although there are a couple of ACs who are very disruptive, some of us do have ideas and try to be constructive. I also posted the comment about defining the purpose of the board, by the way. I don't currently have an account, so unless I requested that my old account be reactivated, I wouldn't otherwise be able to comment here. I appreciate that I do have the opportunity to participate in this manner. I hope that the community's participation in this journal will show that there's more good than harm that comes from anonymous comments. Some of us ACs would still like to make positive contributions to the site.
By the way, are there still updates being made to Rehash, or has that mostly ceased again? Awhile back, you had suggested a plan to allow anonymous comments on the front page again. I hope that if there's still work being done to Rehash, that this might become a priority again. Again, some of us ACs do care about the site and do appreciate the opportunity to comment on matters like this. I know that ACs can't actually vote on governance matters, but some of us still appreciate the opportunity to speak up.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2023, @07:21AM
Yes, of course you do. And you were soundly rejected by the "active board member" janrinok. No one wants you here! We like SN just the way it is! Bring on more Runaway journals, and khallow complaints, and janrinok whining from a superior position. All good, eh?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by janrinok on Thursday September 14 2023, @09:25AM
I think that all work has now finished on Rehash for the moment.
We all want to see AC comments on the front page again, however how to achieve this without returning to the situation we had a year ago is a much harder nut to crack. We have allowed some sock puppet accounts to run for a while but they have always reverted to personal or moderation abuse eventually. Essentially, there can be no participation without accountability although posting as AC is possible for logged-in accounts.
As I have mentioned elsewhere that, once the future of the site is resolved - and I am optimistic that we are still moving forward but not as fast as we would have hoped, - we might have 2 volunteers to at least look at the Perl code and initially take on some of the maintanence tasks on Rehash. Until we have control of the software again then there is no point is trying to rewrite any of it.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday September 14 2023, @05:56PM (6 children)
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2023, @08:03PM (5 children)
Is this the committee's agenda, or janrinok's agenda? Does janrinok even hold a position within the committee?
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday September 15 2023, @05:19AM (4 children)
Agenda items are solicited from each committee member in advance of any meeting. The secretary (a post that I am temporarily holding while requerdanos is on vacation) is responsible for publishing the agenda at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. I am a committee member.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 15 2023, @09:46AM (3 children)
So, is there actually a meeting on Friday, or will this be like the last two meetings? No Meta Post on the Front Page.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday September 15 2023, @10:27AM (2 children)
Why don't you turn up and see who else is available for the meeting. We all have lives too you know.
The Governance Meetings don't get reported in a Meta - we are using journals as you well know.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2023, @02:39AM (1 child)
I am afraid I will be spam modded if I show up.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2023, @07:04AM
And, indeed, you were troll modded for even suggesting the same! Toxic website! Fucking go ahead an spam mod this post, you fucking assholes of termerity and bungholishness! Bring down the curses of aristarchus! Don't you see what he has done? And you have all carried it out. What a bunch of pathetic loosers. Give me a sec, here, to reco-operate. 501c3 Only way to go. Nobody is going to PayPal SoylentNews, just to let you know.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 16 2023, @08:11AM
I would hope that, as a community, we could come to agreement about very common things, like bylaws and meeting times for the Governance Committee. But, alas, as with the chair of the first session, such conviviality is not to be the case. More, and more, it seems that the Board (NCommander) had the best interests of SoylentNews in mind when he offered to just shut the site down. Sometimes, the coup de grace is the kindest cut of all. Accept it, janrinok, like a Bushi.