|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 12, 2005 2:48 pm
The following are the currently active policies active in GULAG, resulting from passed proposals:
1. There should be between three and five council members. This is open for change if the guild grows to a point where more council members are necessary. [passed on Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:00 pm]
2. The council members will be elected on a consensus model. [passed on Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:00 pm]
3. In addition to having moderator status, all of the council members will have access to the AnarchoAdmin. [passed on Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:00 pm]
4. If a majority of guild members have an issue with a particular council member, their modship will be revoked and a new person will be instituted in their place. [passed on Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:00 pm]
5. Upon revoking a particular character's modship, the remainder of the council will change the password to the AnarchoAdmin. [passed on Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:00 pm]
6. Utilizing any moderation function will be explicitly logged in a stickied, locked topic. [passed on Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:00 pm]
7. Any non-emergency use of mod or admin powers will first be voted upon in the standard consensus model with the exception of accepting join requests. [passed on Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:00 pm]
8. Any issue or policy change that any guild member wishes to discuss can be submitted via post to a stickied queue thread titled: Undiscussed Proposals. [passed Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:49 am]
9. Only one proposal will be discussed at a time, in a stickied thread titled: Current Proposal. [passed Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:49 am]
10. Proposals will be selected for debate in Current Proposal from the queue thread on a first-come/first-served basis. [passed Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:49 am]
11. Emergencies can be prioritized over less necessary guild proposals, but all reachable guild council members must agree by consensus that the situation in question is an emergency. [passed Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:49 am]
12. Voting on proposals shall be done via post instead of poll, so we don't have the issue of people not standing up for their opinions (or just manipulating polls and potentially delaying resolution as we wait for consensus). It should be advised that those voting in such a way should also provide justification, so that other GULAG members will be able to take that line of thinking into consideration in forming or revising their own point of view. [passed Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:49 am]
13. All decision-making is finalized with consensus (except in the case of disciplinary actions, which operate on consensus-1). Consensus is determined on 7-day cycles. Should a seven-day cycle pass with everybody in agreement one way or another, then the proposal is passed or denied as appropriate for that case. Proposals will remain open for debate until consensus is reached during a seven-day period. [passed Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:49 am]
14. Once a proposal is decided upon, its contents shall be archived (in the stickied Guild Archives thread) by the next GULAG council member to log in, and its results added to the sticked Policies thread. [passed Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:49 am]
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 12, 2005 2:50 pm
The following are the currently active council members:
kasaikiree [as of Sun May 01 2005]
Obach Stove [as of Sun May 01 2005]
Famicommie [as of Sun May 01 2005]
Next Dollar After [as of Sun May 01 2005]
aufheben [as of Sun May 01 2005]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 3:40 pm
<.< >.>
why do we need council members.... why do we need designated mods?
what will happen if the average dude has mod ability?
this thing is bumming me out, i think we should set ourselves up with a totaly free system where all new and active members have mod status.
you know because we're here for ANARCHY!! not hey.... lets have a bullshit direct democracy.
dose no one here have any hope for anarchy or are we just abunch of ******** heads looking to talk about theory and never get around to practice it.
Here and now people here and now!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 8:58 pm
Hmmm, I agree. Granted, we're not as bad as The Black Anarchy where we give mod positions for donations, but democracy or not, if we want to stand up for what we truly believe then we have to show it.
After all, if a group of Anarchists can't do it in their own guild, then who can? After all, we of all people should be the most open to this idea, even if it has been debated for a long time.
And I'm curious, who is the person that is currently implementing these policies? Because from what I can tell, Auftheben defines most of the rules, yet he's never around. One thing I must ask, exactly who is he? Is he one of our members with a separate account? Because to be honest, I don't like having everything defined for us by someone we don't even know.
And if he is one of us, I really want to talk to them about actually improving guild policies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:27 pm
something like this was tried originally before either of you were members a mod account with a public password was created and all members were given access. An individual took over the account and locked all the threads in the forum. luckily we were able to get things back to normal pretty quickly and after that instituted a different system. Unfortunately the internet is not the same thing as real life interactions and the amount of anonymity and lack of accountability for your actions makes somethings impossible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:42 am
I agree with Ben.
I've been unfortuanate enough to have someone do that with a forum I made quite a few years ago.
This person was my friend by the way, and he got upset because we made fun of him, because that's just how my group of friends is, we make fun of each other, but it's all in good humour, y'know? He got offended easily, and started messing with people's accounts, so I had to take him off the mod board.
It's sad, but the internet makes people real a** holeish, because we feel less responsible with internet commitments than real life ones.
We can blow off people we've never met before, because it's next to impossible for them to find you, but you can't do that with people you know in real life, it's harder.
So yeah.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:12 pm
Instead of doing a repeat, I'll throw this over to Undiscussed proposals. I made a post concerning this over there. ->
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 11:03 pm
What kind of thread is this? It's hypocritical for this guild and the thread starer's political stance. Looking at the first two posts, I can tell this guy believes in an organized system and is only here to "look cool".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 3:40 am
SkaBanana What kind of thread is this? It's hypocritical for this guild and the thread starer's political stance. Looking at the first two posts, I can tell this guy believes in an organized system and is only here to "look cool". They originally gave everyone access to the admin account, but someone took control of it, and locked everyone out. This board isn't really saying no one can become an admin, it's saying you have to show your trust worthy by gaining the approval of everyone, not just the admins. I was almost brought in, but then the guild died. I wouldn't even concern my self with the counsel, it's not as if they do anything. The only time I've seen an admin do anything was when he removed the anarchist cook book stuff some dumb punk was posting, because it will get the guild banned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
