Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 19:36:37
In reply to Re: a quote which deserves to be quoted correctly....., posted by Willful on December 12, 2010, at 17:34:28
> Unfortunately, on the merits here, and admittedly not having read the ins and outs of every post-- I have to stand with Bob on the issue of elections.
>
> If he appoints the council it will be no different from the deputies.The only way council would be the same as deputies is if:
1. He is the one who chooses who to appoint; and
2. If Council has the power to issue blocksElections that include campaigning and there being winners and losers is devisive here. I've suggested that if the community memebers each send him by private mail their choices for Council - and he starts with the first five who have the most nominations - asks each of them if they are willimng to serve, and then goes down the list until he finds the five with the most nominations who are willing to serve - then he has gotten who the community wants - without subjecting the community to campaigns and elections. Appointment probably isn't the best word for it - - but it's decidedly different than the campaign and election process Bob is focusing on.
> I also notice that we haven't at all articulated the rules that govern actions by the council, Bob's involvement in referring cases to or passing on cases adjudged by the council and many other areas of potential disagreement, cynicism and what I perceive as animadversions on Bob's character, motives, etcMy understanding is that Council would be independent of Bob. Their only power would be to shorten blocks - and they would not be beholden to him to do it. He has outlined it in his post with the proposal. He has added that it would be the responsibility of the blocked poster to contact council and negotiate the terms of a shortened block. It won't be their job to hunt down blocked posters and offer them reprieve.
> Whatever my personal frustrations with the system here, and I have many, I do see over and over again that the community is inflexible, afraid of change, quick to get angry at one another and be cutting, whether overtly or more subtle, entirely willing to stymie change, etc, which lead me to question our motives, goals,and so on.Maybe I'm a little idealistic - but I just don't see the community in those terms - not in an overall way anyway. I just don't see that much of the the negative things you describe. I think that at the times it does happen, though, that may be what sticks with some folks as far as their memory. But I think if we look through the archives - there is much more support than those other things. I do, though, think that change is hard. Many people are afraid of it. Also, a lot of people are busy, and they develop misunderstandings about changes under consideration. I don't think it speaks to their motivations though.
> I see a bit of a power struggle going on here where various people for their own reasons, want to control how this power is allocated.Perhaps.. but I not sure it's really possible for anyone here to control how the power is allocated. King Bob has all the power - and it's not being allocated anywhere except where he is willing to allocate it.
> And to be honest, Bob has every reason to be very careful about how this is done-- so that it doesn't create a ton of headaches, more work, a lot of unhappiness, criticisms and downright insults to him, etcI wholly agree with you on that. Which is why I have trouble understanding why he wouldn't see that campaigns and elections could easily be quite disruptive.
> I don't mean to be uncivil. But we really need to look at our behavior too.
>
> WillfulI sure didn't see anything uncivil in what you shared.. and I agree that it's important that we all look at ourselves in how we respond to the transfer of power that's under consideration.
Solstice
poster:Solstice
thread:964630
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101201/msgs/973322.html