Searching \ for '[OT] Admin stuff' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=admin+stuff
Search entire site for: 'Admin stuff'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] Admin stuff'
2010\07\08@085301 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
Note tag changed to OT.

RussellMc wrote:
> Please read list guidelines re what is appropriate for the list.
> *If* this sort of material is appropriate at all it belongs in [OT].
> And then politely and in a reasoned manner.

You guys have to keep in mind that it's easy to forget to change the tag,
especially when you're replying on the same topic.  When you're the one
deliberately changing the topic you have a little less excuse, but you have
to understand it's still easy to forget.

> (See the example that someone has posted in [OT] (changing the tag of
> their own volition ! :-)  - arguably still not quite within list
> guidelines

Then the guidlines are too strict.  You have to let people get things off
their chest once in a while.  You cause more long term problems by making
them keep it bottled up.  And telling them to only complain to admins
privately, or the offender privately, just makes things worse.  I'm sure
Vitaliy and Jim wanted everyone to hear their opinion.  It's important and
necessary that individual people's opinions of what is acceptable be
occasionally heard by all.  That of course doesn't mean anyone has to agree
and very unlikely anything will change, but just letting people gripe once
in a while is important.  Think of this as a sortof "peer review" admin
process.  That's a lot better in the end than a dictatorial admin process.
You should embrace it instead of fight it.  Realize that some of that will
go on and get over it.  The real admin task is to make sure it doesn't go
too far, and to keep it from polluting PIC and EE (or even TECH ;-) ).  Most
of the time these things won't go too far.  If you think they do, then your
threshold of too far is probably not in the right place.

That all said, I thought the comments by Vitaliy and Jim were pointless
because we've been over this many times before.  I thought calling me a
"bully" was just a bit over the line, but I'm a big boy and last I checked
I'm still intact here at the other end of the internet no worse off.  Please
don't do anything about that on my account.  Recognize that everyone is
going to see the threshold differently, that no harm was done, and forgive a
little heat of the moment words.  The worst thing you can do is try to "fix"
anything.  A simple reminder like "Guys, keep the foodfight on OT and let's
keep the name calling down to a minimum" would have been more effective both
short term and long.  Note the explicit lack of any threat.  Don't try to
"snip things in the bud" trying to avoid real offenses later, because then
those that didn't actually commit a offense feel unjustly punished.

> Admins are most effective when
> they never need to do anything and can be seen as a lurking power -

Actually, that's a mistake.  Admins are most effective when going out of
their way to not appear to project power, then only do so in the very rare
clearly-off-the-deep-end cases.

In other words, chill out.  Let a few little things happen, keep it off the
main channels as necessary realizing it's easy to simply forget to change
the tag without mallace, perhaps a occasional gentle reminder, and you'll
very rarely have a real problem.  Let people get things off their chests.
I'd rather Vitaliy and Jim hadn't said what they said, but that's mostly
because they said it in such a way I felt I had to respond to defend myself.
I don't agree and never will, and likely they feel the same about my
opinions.  I seriously doubt anyone's opinion or future action was changed
by this exchange, but hey, sometimes people have to vent.  Relax, get over
it.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

2010\07\08@114446 by Marechiare

picon face
> Recognize that everyone is going to see the threshold differently,
> that no harm was done, and forgive a little heat of the moment
> words.  The worst thing you can do is try to "fix" anything.

Let the old kids enjoy the game. Let'em "fix"/"unfix" or whatever
experiment they'd like to try. Perhaps some day they'd invent better
rules for the mankind. Let's wait and see them getting their nobel
prize :-)

2010\07\08@214202 by Vitaliy

face
flavicon
face
My original comment was addressed to Andrew, not Olin. I know Olin considers
his style acceptable, so we agree to disagree. He is a much nicer person, in
person.

Admins are not royalty, nor are they prison guards. Admins are police
officers, meaning they're public servants with special powers. With power
comes responsibility, for example you have to be more polite/patient than
the average citizen. The power must also be checked, otherwise the cops will
quickly start abusing it and hitting you over the head with a baton.


Russel said:
> Additionally:
>                    Please do not respond to admins onlist in the
> manner that you subsequently did. The merits and/or truthfulness or
> not of anything you say is irrelevant.

Russell, I love you, but you are dead wrong. They ARE relevant. I wouldn't
want to face a judge or a juror who is prejudiced against me, and much less
one who openly hates me. A decent judge would excuse himself in a similar
situation.


> Admins are most effective when
> they never need to do anything and can be seen as a lurking power -
> benevolent or malevolent as you see fit to perceive them.

Yes. Paine would say, "that government is best which governs least."


> By getting
> in the face of an individual admin onlist you pose an unnecessary
> personally based  challenge to the admins effectiveness overall.

The admin got *in my face*, first -- and he did it publicly.


> Failure of admins to respond appropriately to such a challenge or to
> show solidarity makes admins look weak and powerless and reduces their
> effectiveness*. Responding appropriately would not be appreciated by
> you. Please throw down such gauntlets offlist. By all means send
> material to spam_OUTpiclist-ownerTakeThisOuTspammit.edu as desired - repeatedly if deemed
> necessary.

Do you really want the PICList to be a "Harmonious Society"? :)

Sorry, but allowing the admins to save face is not at the top of my priority
list. You guys need to deal with the problem, instead you continue to sweep
it under the rug.


Olin Lathrop wrote:
{Quote hidden}

I agree with majority of Olin's comments. Set up clear rules, enforce them
consistently, and otherwise just leave us alone. And we will all live long
and prosper.

Vitaliy

2010\07\08@224640 by John Gardner

picon face
All this goes away, were the parties Gentlemen.

Too much to ask, these days...

Jack

2010\07\09@082622 by Marechiare
picon face
Yes, I have to agree, some good points were made.

{Quote hidden}

2010\07\09@085215 by RussellMc

face picon face
Hatless:

> Yes, I have to agree, some good points were made.

A Delphic utterance :-)
By who?

Avoiding reposting whole prior post is to be preferred. FWIW.

             Russell

2010\07\09@085933 by John Ferrell

face
flavicon
face
It would also go away if every one would watch the reruns of the TV
program "Big Bang Theory" and decide which character role best fits
themselves... and their peers!
I think I tend to drift through all the roles a day at a time!
*John Ferrell, W8CCW*

On 7/8/2010 10:46 PM, John Gardner wrote:
> All this goes away, were the parties Gentlemen.
>
> Too much to ask, these days...
>
> Jack
>    

2010\07\09@091709 by RussellMc

face picon face
> My original comment was addressed to Andrew, not Olin.

Indeed.
But they were inappropriate regardless of who they were addressed to.
The adequate reason is "because" the "guidelines say so" but a major
reason they say so is because they cause to happen what happened next
- you "rifle loaded" for Jim, as we were off.

At a VERY VERY VERY minimum put such material in OT. And then try not
to incite others (which is not a comment on what you did or didn't try
to do :-) ).

My opinions on the merits of what people wrote are irrelevant. It
happens that I think that everyone has some good points, variably well
made. But plastering it all across PIC is asking for what happened
next. Alas.

> I know Olin considers
> his style acceptable, so we agree to disagree.

That's going too far.
You should maintain at least a vestige of desire that he would change :-).

> He is a much nicer person, in
> person.

I'd hope so :-)  (again).

> Admins are not royalty, nor are they prison guards. Admins are police
> officers, meaning they're public servants with special powers.

None of those things.
Admins are slaves, servants of the list membership, desirers and
workers towards the common and greater good.

> With power comes responsibility,

Yes.

> for example you have to be more polite/patient than
> the average citizen.

No. You don't have to be.
BUT, fwiw, I choose to try very hard to be.
But on some lists the admins never respond to criticism, never
explain, never justify - they just kneecap.
It seems to work effectively, as you don't hear from the kneecapped as
their screams of rage are suppressed.
Some list members here have been subject to this type of treatment and
are not, as far as I can ascertain, impressed with it. It's easier
here where that very very largely doesn't occur. I try harder than you
may be aware to keep it that way.
(But its tempting :-) ).

> The power must also be checked, otherwise the cops will
> quickly start abusing it and hitting you over the head with a baton.

Must?
Few and far between are the batons.
So far that some, present company exemplars, who on occasion run
around attempting to provoke batoning.


> Russel said:
> > Additionally:
> >                    Please do not respond to admins onlist in the
> > manner that you subsequently did. The merits and/or truthfulness or
> > not of anything you say is irrelevant.

> Russell, I love you,

Kiss kiss :-).
I consider you like a son.
That's flippant but also somewhat serious ! :-).
[love, concern, sorrow, desire for best outcomes, pride, shock, ...]

> but you are dead wrong.

Often enough, but ...

>They ARE relevant. I wouldn't
> want to face a judge or a juror who is prejudiced against me, and much less
> one who openly hates me. A decent judge would excuse himself in a similar
> situation.

Straw man - two situations rolled into one and then the one not
pertinent being addressed.
The 2 issues are:
      1. Whether bias exists and if so what to do about it.
      2. Due process for dealing with 1.
I was an am talking about 2.
You are attempting to talk about 1. and attributing my point to 1.

By all means disagree with how you feel you are and/or should be treated.
BUT take it up with the admins.
"Getting in the face" of an admin over admin matters that affect you
on list is not wise - regardless of whether your point has merit or
not. Doing it in [PIC] is doubly unwise.

> > Admins are most effective when
> > they never need to do anything and can be seen as a lurking power -
> > benevolent or malevolent as you see fit to perceive them.
>
> Yes. Paine would say, "that government is best which governs least."

And, not at all would be marvellous.

> > By getting
> > in the face of an individual admin onlist you pose an unnecessary
> > personally based  challenge to the admins effectiveness overall.
>
> The admin got *in my face*, first -- and he did it publicly.

No.
There's a major point here.
Bob addressed an issue involving 3 people.
All knew that their input had the prospect of ramping things up - even
if only between themselves.
Apart from calling their input "crap", which term I feel was more
provocative than was ideal, the admin response was fair enough and
balanced enough. You were mentioned (and seekers-of-freedom have
regularly asked that such things be done in public, but specifically
noted as NOT the lead player. Your use of "bully" can be laughed off
as something Olin could take and/or 'fair comment' (as some do see him
in that light)(even if he doesn''t)  BUT was about guaranteed to
provide bullets for somebody else to use. Merit is not the issue.
There was a fair admin point made. For argument, lets cancel out
"crap" with "bully" - that still leaves starting a near certain fire
fight (you succeeded)  in the midst of [PIC] - enough grounds for
admin intervention - and, again, you were one of 3 mentioned and
explicitly not top of the list.

So, to then on list start in on your old baggage of hate and enemy etc
(merit or not irregardless)  ON list in PIC is asking for problems and
far far far closer to 'getting in someones face' (my term) than
anything else that had gone before.
The message was and is the same - 'Take it outside, please.'

> > Failure of admins to respond appropriately to such a challenge or to
> > show solidarity makes admins look weak and powerless and reduces their
> > effectiveness*. Responding appropriately would not be appreciated by
> > you. Please throw down such gauntlets offlist. By all means send
> > material to piclist-ownerspamKILLspammit.edu as desired - repeatedly if deemed
> > necessary.
>
> Do you really want the PICList to be a "Harmonious Society"? :)

Yes please. (I don't know if that term has wider implications but,
taken at face value, yes).

> Sorry, but allowing the admins to save face is not at the top of my priority
> list.

Indeed.
But you miss my point.
It is important for the list members that admins have "face" and
"respect" and are listened to.
It's not important how badly the individuals are treated as
individuals (although some may not appreciate that :-) )P. When "you"
spit on an admin you insult the list membership. The admins are
slaves/servants/ dogsbody's who have no merit or rights or rewards or
status as individuals. They are mere shadows to fill the exalted
undeserved position of "Admin" (Y'All bow now, Y' hear!).
When "you" attack the position (whoever and whenever this hypothetical
actor and act may be) you potentially make the list less well managed
etc etc etc ad nauseum. Said trembling encumbents may have to finally
reach a point where the 12 gauge is reluctantly taken out of the arms
cupboard, dusted down, loaded, cocked and waved around. Failure to do
so makes rubbish of the whole system and allows the most noisy most
obnoxious and most uncaring to create mayhem. Or to post cr ... er
rubbish in [PIC] :-).

> You guys need to deal with the problem, instead you continue to sweep
> it under the rug.

Kerchunk ... :-)
(Or is that a metallic click?
Only joking. really.

Let's leave all of Olin's stuff that you quote in here.
Read it again.
There is a point:

{Quote hidden}

To which Vitaliy said:

> I agree with majority of Olin's comments. Set up clear rules, enforce them
> consistently, and otherwise just leave us alone. And we will all live long
> and prosper.

AND, I largely agree with what Olin said, at least in principle and in
large part in detail,  and with what you said.

And/but - the rules were clear enough that you transgressed. You can
read through them and have no easy way (unless you are unbeknownst to
us, also a lawyer) to justify them. BUT when 'called' as part of a
group you complain and escalate the offense.
A reasonable reading of the clear enough rules suggests that a
wet-noodle-wrist-slap one week on moderation would be appropriate. 12
gauge back in the arms locker. BUT I have no doubt as to how you'd
react to such a "penalty". No ? :-).

So, here we are again arguing over why we should have clear rules but
not expect to stick to them. No?

______

FWIW - what I do disagree with in what Olin said is how reasonable it
is for people to go on and on and on and on and on and on about
something they disagree with  (me too :-) ) when they can't get their
own way - regardless of what the clear rules say. We had that
situation about ?4? months ago and 100's of posts were posted going
over and over and over and over and ... the same ground. looks like we
are about to start another round. No?


          Russell

2010\07\09@095301 by Marechiare

picon face
> Hatless:
>
>> Yes, I have to agree, some good points were made.
>
> A Delphic utterance :-)
> By who?

The entire post, I quoted, was rather wise, in my opinion; and I don't
care who was the author. I won't be surpised if you load him with some
admin chores.

2010\07\09@145453 by Vitaliy

face
flavicon
face
RussellMc wrote (in Quoted! Printable! :)
> Do you really want the PICList to be a "Harmonious Society"? :)

"Yes please. (I don't know if that term has wider implications but,
taken at face value, yes)."

I thought you of all people would know what it means for sure. First hit on
Google:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonious_society

Until next time,

Vitaliy


2010\07\09@151508 by Vitaliy

face
flavicon
face
Marechiare wrote:
> The entire post, I quoted, was rather wise, in my opinion; and I don't
> care who was the author. I won't be surpised if you load him with some
> admin chores.

I think I'm quite safe. At one point I got tired of the whining (the job is
hard, and stressful, and thankless, and you have to put up with jerks, and
you don't get paid) so when someone (Wouter?) suggested that I stop
complaining and help administer the list, I said "sure". AFAICT the powers
that be don't consider me suitable admin material. But at least I'm no
longer told "if you're so smart, why don't you try it" -- they're afraid
I'll take them up on the offer. :-)

Vitaliy

2010\07\09@184209 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
RussellMc wrote:
> But on some lists the admins never respond to criticism, never
> explain, never justify - they just kneecap.
> It seems to work effectively, as you don't hear from the kneecapped as
> their screams of rage are suppressed.

Yes, shipping off anyone with subversive thoughts to Siberia has been tried
and found to work for a while.  But you also get a lot of unsatisfied
subjects ready to pounce on you the moment they see a opportunity, or strive
to leave as quicly as possible.  Eventually the system collapses rather
spectacularly.  This has also been found to be true from experience.

>> The power must also be checked, otherwise the cops will
>> quickly start abusing it and hitting you over the head with a baton.
>
> Must?

Yes I think so, since this system has no mandate or consent from the
governed.  As far as us peons groveling in the dirt can tell, the system of
succession of PIClist admins is based on a farcical aquatic ritual envolving
unnatural acts with a sword and a stone or something.  Without a mandate and
the implied consensus that goes with it, you have to tread extra lightly.
Unless of course you resort to as described above.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

2010\07\09@222954 by RussellMc

face picon face
>> Do you really want the PICList to be a "Harmonious Society"? :)
>
> "Yes please. (I don't know if that term has wider implications but,
> taken at face value, yes)."
>
> I thought you of all people would know what it means for sure. First hit on
> Google:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonious_society

I avoided Gargoyling it.
I'd not met it as a term - only experienced it :-)

You think that a few more river crabs are in order then? :-)


             R

2010\07\09@233929 by John Gardner

picon face
> ... Harmonious Society...

Excellent, Vitaliy.

The difference between self-restraint & prior restraint needs explaining
to some, apparently...

Jack

2010\07\10@002735 by RussellMc

face picon face
> The difference between self-restraint & prior restraint needs explaining
> to some, apparently...

Aye.
Apparently.

            Russell

2010\07\10@004153 by RussellMc

face picon face
Worth a comment in view of other comments

I said:
>> (See the example that someone has posted in [OT] (changing the tag of
>> their own volition ! :-)  - arguably still not quite within list
>> guidelines

Olin said:
> Then the guidlines are too strict.

Quite probably. I'd prefer none at all.
I found Oli's post, which I was referring to, extremely reasonable,
and essentially agreed with what he said.

I'd  prefer things to appear as if  they were the product of Vitaliy's
cited 'harmonious society"* (aka modern rendition of "Great Unity"
from about 200 BC!!! ) aka " ... and thy neighbo[u]r as thyself from
somewhat earlier BUT without any underlying compulsion whatsoever.




          Russell

* Alas, those who howl loudest against the undergirdings of "river
crab" / harmonious society / great unity* also seem to be those who,
from time to time, decide to make it look almost desirable.

FWIW: This message will be unlikely to be seen in China.

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2010 , 2011 only
- Today
- New search...