Meeting?

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

I have heard a rumor that there is going to be some meeting this week about the administration of this community. I would like to hear the facts of this meeting, the time, and location.

Thanks.

Comments

[ron_newman]

I think you're referring to this. I'm not sure why it wasn't posted in both places.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

I think the details need to be posted here. Not everyone has been following the weekend of drama.

[ron_newman]

I know very little about what happened, having not logged in while it occurred. However, I suggested a davis_square meetup a few weeks ago, when I first posted here, so this seems like a good opportunity for local folks to get to know each other.

[komos.livejournal.com]

It's also not meant to be dramatic. ^_^

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm sure it's not meant to, but you gotta admit that there was *drama* in the air this weekend. couldn't you smell it wafting across the square?

[bikergeek.livejournal.com]

Is that what that was? I thought the winds had shifted so the smell was drifting over from New Jersey.

/ex-NJ boy

[komos.livejournal.com]

Well, the meeting wasn't meant to be dramatic, at least. ^_^

[komos.livejournal.com]

As we had discussed it, it has nothing to do with the administration of this community, but rather is to determine the fate of the breakaway now that davis_square is under new management. It seemed wrong just to delete the space outright since ~30 people signed on over the weekend, so we wanted to get a feel for what people were thinking.

This isn't to say that it's meant to be exclusive to folks who got on the second group. The idea was just to make it available to folks who had a stake and hear what they had to say. We'll be at the Diesel at 7:30 Wednesday. Please feel free to come by.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

See, I feel that it's relevant. I would strongly prefer no splintering of the community, but a community that seems viable enough to pull in 5-10 (or more) people to an in-person meeting seems viable enough to survive. Let's get that energy back in here.

[komos.livejournal.com]

Fair enough. I'm guessing that's the direction we're headed in.

[plumtreeblossom.livejournal.com]

I was just about to post it. Will do so right now!

[bluepapercup]

A meeting? You have got to be kidding me.

Maybe if I just ignore all of this it will go away and I can go back to reading about where the best place to get my nails done is.

'Cause, y'know, I never thought it was that bad in here, but hoo boy, was I wrong. Now we have to have a meeting.

[talonvaki.livejournal.com]

Seriously. I don't see what the big deal is: anything long and advertis-y should be lj-cut cut. This is pretty much an LJ standard and not "censorship" or whatever else people are trying to label it. In no other community of which I'm a member is it considered scandalous to have to lj-cut a post and it have un-cut posts deleted by mods is expected.

Why it's an issue here is mystifying. Or maybe people just have nothing better to do?

[bryant]

Good moderation = just do it, don't make a huge pile of drama about it.

It takes two, y'know? There are always gonna be people who react badly to moderation. If you get in a tizzy about it, make a bunch of stern posts, and so on... well.

[hauntmeister.livejournal.com]

And what to do if the moderator deletes all posts critical of her actions?

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

One assumes that's part of sitting back and not giving a crap. =) Shall you be at the meeting?

[komos.livejournal.com]

Since the breakaway has been somewhat misrepresented, this is why I created it:

a) The ad cut rule was inconsistently and in some cases selectively enforced;
b) Historically, when asked about the inconsistency, the mods invoked moderator fiat or simply refused to discuss it; and
c) neitherday deleted a post about the ad cut rule that itself was not in violation of any of the community rules, moved to entirely moderated posting, and threatened to delete the community altogether.

Why there was an issue is that there was a lot unnecessary drama being caused by the mods of the community. The only thing at issue now is what to do with the community I created now that the broader community is under new management. That's all the meeting wis intended to do, and as a result, it wasn't posted here. Since there are ~30 people who signed on, at the very least it seems impolite just to delete that space without hearing what they have to say.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

there was only a single mod of the community before the beginning of the weekend. LiveJournal is, at best, a hobby, not a job. you can't expect a single person to put full time effort into an LJ community, after all.

I suspect that some people are feeling very imposed upon when in reality, the 'inconsistency' was quite likely just not having time, all the time.

[bryant]

Yeah, and the mod was also running 10+ communities. Which... is perhaps too much for one person to do for precisely the reasons you mention.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

*shrug* It really depends on the activity in the community. I've known people to own as many, but if they get no traffic, no one really cares how they are administered.

[komos.livejournal.com]

There were two maintainers listed prior to this weekend, but that's not really at issue...

No one is expecting that anyone devote all of their time to an online community, but the trouble with was not simply that entries were missed. What constituted an ad was applied rather capriciously (for instance, there was a film looking for space to shoot that was recently deleted which did not appear to fall within the offered definition of ads), and the response could range from letting it be, asking in comments that it be cut, or just outright deletion.

The mods appeared unwilling to discuss how best to enforce the relatively recently defined rule, and responded to disagreement by closing discussion. Deleting a post that in no way broke community rules, and threatening an active and vibrant community with deletion just because there were questions over how exactly the rule would be enforced were lines that should not have been crossed.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

As far as I could see--I was online rather a lot this weekend working on a final paper--the post was made, the mod asked that it be cut, someone else, not the OP, shot back a response, and drama ensued. It didn't feel like a single event had caused the issue, it felt more like a buildup, but then I'm not really sure from what.

My only real concern is that now, for whatever reason, the old maintainer of the community is no longer a maintainer of the community, and there are new ones, possibly including yourself. If all the new maintainers happen to be just random individuals who have a shared interest in the community, great! it could use some active leadership, and a clearer defintion of advertisement, because yeah, I'm all about the cutting of the ads. But, if this is some weird personal thing, and every single one of the new maintainers are all roommates or BFF and it's just one clique action against another--that's a little strange. So I'd rather see things be out in the air.

And then there will be a (probably large) contigent of people who could give a s---, as is clearly visible from some of the comments on this post.

You must understand that I am not trying to start trouble, call names, or foment drama. I just want to see a valuable community get good leadership and not become a giant ad venue that sucks.

[komos.livejournal.com]

I completely understand. I actually missed the main drama this weekend. I came in about when hauntmeister's thread got deleted and the community went to mod only. I thought this was going a little too far, and the new space was my no confidence vote. I'm actually kind of surprised how much response we got considering that I hadn't even really intended to go public until I saw how things played out.

I think the new mods are all indy, and I'm not sure how they got selected. From what I understand, cos offered to help, but I don't know about the others.

[tahnan.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure how the new mods got selected, either. I think I'm indy, but I'm not positive how I could tell. Full disclosure: on Saturday I was sitting at a table near someone who might have been Neitherday (who I've never met, so I can't even be sure).

[cos]

I think she just picked a few people who commented on the comments-screened post she made asking if anyone would like co-maintain, recently. We're not a clique. I happen to know dustriderma through a common friend, and see him from time to time, but we hadn't communicated at all about this community. And I don't think I know the other moderator.

I added plumtreeblossom because she was calling a meeting, and that seemed an indication that she wanted to put some time and initiative into the community. I know her only vaguely, from Theatre@First (which I'm not in, but my friends are, and I go to see their plays).

[ron_newman]

what is BFF?

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

It's a riff on 'best friends forever' that is the kind of thing that junior-high kids put in each other's school yearbooks and such.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

I have to agree with you. I guess there is some ambiguity of what an 'ad' is, but in my book (and I said as much on davis_meta) that an advertisement is an announcement or solicitation for a good or service, and that includes 'I need a *blank*' or 'vote for my candidate'.

[ron_newman]

I like seeing announcements about local cultural events. Since many of them require an admission fee, I guess they would be considered ads, but I think they're useful contributions. And people can always leave comments about the events, either before or after they occur.

[cos]

The general use of the word "ad" is that it's commercial activity. People posting requests for things they're looking for, or about candidates they support, with no money changing hands and no money solicited, is very clearly noncommercial. Yes, there are interpretations of "ad" that include noncommercial stuff, but that doesn't mean the separation between the two categories is undefined. It is possible to say a rule applies to "commercial advertisiting", to clarify that.

(I'm not advocating for or against the current rule about ads, just addressing the specific point you brought up. It is entirely possible to have a consistently enforced rule about ads, that doesn't cover the categories you mention)

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

Advertisement does not imply commercial activity in its purest definition.

[bryant]

Definitely if you just ignore it you won't have to worry about it. The Internet is /great/ that way.

[ron_newman]

I've pretty much ignored it entirely, but I like the idea of local meetups.

[modpixie.livejournal.com]

you should tell tavlonaki that!

[aspasia02.livejournal.com]

yeah, and I agree with you completely. To be honest, the constant postings about other postings and postings about meetings and other postings are getting a bit tiresome. Comments on one post are one thing... this... man.

[cos]

Actually, these sorts of comments (particularly the one on plumtreeblossom's post calling a meeting at Diesel) are drama IMO. If you don't think it should be a big deal, don't treat it as if it is, and refrain from posting sarcastic or cranky comments about how you think people are treating it as too big a deal and implying they should be above all that.

[tahnan.livejournal.com]

Well, it could be a "frikkin message board"; or it could be the online manifestation of a very real community. If it's the former, then sure, it might be odd to meet in person. If it's the latter, then meeting in person makes a great deal of sense. (To be honest, I'm more interested in meeting people than I am in meeting people to discuss message board administration policy. But the meeting isn't about the administration policy per se; it's about the community. So.)