Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

Rules for Administration


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Alexei

Alexei

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 664 posts

Posted 08 October 2007 - 02:55 AM

Unpredictable ruling is generally unacceptable.
As some of us found some administartive actions to be unexpected, we need to know what are the rules of the board administration.
Particularly:
- Do Board Rules are applicable to the members of the Board Administration?
- Rules to determine and apply punishment to the administrative staff.
- Rules used to determine if any non-administrative member breaks the Board Rules.
- Rules used to resolve desputes between members and the Board Administration.
- Rules used in determination of facts (for ex. if 3rd party software is re-distributable).
- Rules to distinquish if particular statement is offensive.
Thanks,
Alexei

#2 was_jaclaz

was_jaclaz

    Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 7100 posts
  • Location:Gone in the mist
  •  
    Italy

Posted 08 October 2007 - 09:09 AM

@All
As at this moment, there are NO coded Rules for Admins, everything is delegated to the people who has been appointed, in practice, yours truly :cheers:.

To clarify the "powers" on this board, it is like this, at the moment:
1) Nuno Brito is Owner of the board and Root Administrator, he has EVERY power
2) jaclaz is appointed Administrator of the board, and has exactly the same amount of powers
3) a number of "special" members have more powers than "normal" members, at the moment of this writing:
33 .script developers
42 Advanced Members
11 Developers
5 Lady
The "general" powers that each group has, and each individual within each group are very similar, the difference is some added specific powers to those that are Moderators of a forum, individually or as a group.
You can determine who (person or group) has Moderator powers by reading here:
http://www.boot-land...orums/index.php
the "Led by:" line.

Action of Members are subject, within limits, to the approval of the Moderator(s) of the specific forum, actions of both Members and Moderators are subject, indistinctly, to the approval of Administrators.

Though having full powers on the board, and being explicitly allowed by Nuno to administer the board as I see fit, I try to avoid, exception made for the rare cases of emergencies (Nuno non reachable) and for ordinary admininistration (moving threads started in the wrong forum, deleting spam, etc.) doing any "heavy" moderation or more generally anything that could cause resentments among members, without consulting Nuno beforehand or pointing out for his approval (or denial) what I did, in order to allow him to correct, if he wishes to do so, any action I carried on possibly contrary to his will.

@Alexei
I understand that you find this pyramidal structure not of your liking, that, particularly, you do not approve of my way of administering the board, and that you find unfair that "judgements" on the behaviour of all members is completely in the hands of a single person, but this is the way it is, I am just trying to represent you the actual situation.

Going into details:

- Do Board Rules are applicable to the members of the Board Administration?

Yes, everyone is subjected to the Rules.
But remember that in the structure as it is, Nuno can only be induced to respect them by his own conscience, I am only subject to my conscience and to his judgement, and everyone else is subject to both me and Nuno, with Nuno's decisions always prevailing over mine.

- Rules to determine and apply punishment to the administrative staff.

There are none, there will never be, Nuno is the boss and he will do whatever he sees fit, anytime.

- Rules used to determine if any non-administrative member breaks the Board Rules.

As said there are none, see above.

- Rules used to resolve desputes between members and the Board Administration.

Given the structure as above described, there are no and there will be no rules to resolve "desputes" between members and the Board Administration, actually, if you follow for a moment the way this kind of organizational structure works, technically there are no "desputes" between members and the Board Administrations, there can be only members that refuse to comply to guidelines and/or explicit requests issued by the Board Administrators.
Depending from which side you are on, you can call them "attempts to mutiny" or "acts of rebellion against the tyrant".

- Rules used in determination of facts (for ex. if 3rd party software is re-distributable).

These are not yet set, that was what I was seeking cooperation for, in order to actually write them in as much as possible plain and simple way, we were here last time:
http://www.boot-land...?...=3124&st=51
I will start a new thread exclusively for this.

- Rules to distinquish if particular statement is offensive.

No Rules, see above.

Now, can the above described structure and internal regulations (or lack of them) be changed?

Certainly yes, this organizational model is not engraved on stone.

Everything is up to Nuno, I am sure he will listen to your (or everyone else's) ideas and arguments in favour of a different and possibly more "democratic" way of administering the board.

Of course till "when and if" the new model will be in effect, the current one is and will be operative.

jaclaz

#3 Alexei

Alexei

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 664 posts

Posted 08 October 2007 - 12:25 PM

As we see, Administration (particularly jaclaz) is not ready to enforce Board Rules in a predictable way.
I believe, predictability of the ruler is a common requirement in a modern civilized world.
So, until administrative actions become predictable, enforcing them in a harsh/strict manner should be considered uncivilized, and probably in violation of the Board Rules. Please take a note that I did not state that such enforcement already took place.

#4 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12688 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 08 October 2007 - 12:37 PM

As we see, Administration (particularly jaclaz) is not ready to enforce Board Rules in a predictable way.
I believe, predictability of the ruler is a common requirement in a modern civilized world.
So, until administrative actions become predictable, enforcing them in a harsh/strict manner should be considered uncivilized, and probably in violation of the Board Rules. Please take a note that I did not state that such enforcement already took place.

Maybe I suggest my personal 'Admin Rules':
  • As long as I feel personally well in a forum, the mods and admins may do what in their (well founded) opinion has to be done.
  • If I do not feel well in that forum, I simply leave.
  • I do not want to change an existing forum's behaviour when joining
    (If I do not like, I do not join)
Peter

#5 phox

phox

    Silver Member

  • .script developer
  • 764 posts

Posted 08 October 2007 - 12:45 PM

  • As long as I feel personally well in a forum, the mods and admins
    may do what in their (well founded) opinion has to be done.
  • If I do not feel well in that forum, I simply leave.
  • I do not want to change an existing forum's behaviour when joining
    (If I do not like, I do not join)



:cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

End of the discussion!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users