View Full Version : To Have or Have Not: Need an Advisory Board?



JustKev
01-30-2011, 07:58 AM
Since there seems to be a few people who are just plain against the Advisory Board even existing let's do a down and dirty poll here.

Vote for or against and let's see.

JustKev
01-30-2011, 08:12 AM
It should be noted, this is not an "Official" Poll. Once completed, Rick is still the owner of the site and he can choose to have an advisory board whether or not this poll indicates users want one.

Mainiac1957
01-30-2011, 08:57 AM
Since the board has done no harm so why not keep it. Maybe some fresh blood will stir some new community outreach form it. (The Advisory Board) Not saying that past elected members weren't doing what was expected, just a new perspective perhaps. I myself try to get along with everybody. Some folks out there just don't want to be gotten along with I'm sorry to say. And no, I will not name any names on a public forum. If you feel I am talking about you personally, I apologize for not jumping into another name calling dual.

JustKev
01-30-2011, 09:02 AM
The other option would be to farm out the advisory board to who ever McAfee farmed out their customer support to. Good grief. Over half an hour trying to explain that I'd formatted one PC to upgrade to 64-bit from 32. Finally got them to delete one activation from a 3-PC activation so I could reinstall my virus scanner.

brdad
01-30-2011, 09:19 AM
Since the board has done no harm so why not keep it.

That is perhaps the best question. Just what reason is there for not having an advisory board? The board members are not paid, it is not costing the members anything. The board does not secretly control caching standards or approvals. If Rick or myself or any member for that matter has a question they would still often consult trusted friends before addressing the entire site anyway - why not have a set group available?

cano
01-30-2011, 10:50 AM
If the board is the best think in the universe that doesn't do any harm, why does it have to consist of just 4 people? Why not 10 or 500?

Or why to have just one board? If it's great and doesn't cost any money, let's have two boards, or twenty. Why would you want to have just one if it is so good?

I don't see any reason why we should limit any advisory or decision making just to 4 people and therefore I'm against it.

cano
01-30-2011, 11:01 AM
The board does not secretly control caching standards or approvals. If Rick or myself or any member for that matter has a question they would still often consult trusted friends before addressing the entire site anyway - why not have a set group available?

So what does the board secretly control? I think Rick, you, or anybody else already have a group of trusted friends to consult any problems and having the board is not going to change it. If you want to consult anybody outside of your trusted friends why just limit yourself to the board and not ask everybody in this forum for better view.

brdad
01-30-2011, 11:30 AM
The board does not secretly control anything, it does not even openly control anything! When the board was first discussed, it was decided one group of 5 would be the number we would use, 4 elected and Rick. Any group can choose any number they like, that is what this group chose. We could always change the number of boards or members per board if there was a need. So to answer the question, 5 is not the magic number, it is our number. Some people choose to have one car, some people choose to have 5. There is no right or wrong, it is just their decision.

It is not mandatory that any member or moderator only consult the board, they can consult anyone. I have asked moderation questions to non-board members, and even to people who do not belong to the site. But it's nice they are there to ask when I do want to. On other occasions, members have contacted me with suggestions which I welcome as well.

There have been a few changes to the site which were presented to the board as opposed to the entire group because the issue did not need the entire site's input. Examples would be the addition of the photo gallery, the new articles menu, and the Pathtags. A larger group can argue their points for months and never come to a consensus. On matters of little importance, this is a waste of time, especially for issues like the articles menu which can be edited easily to adjust for future needs.

cano
01-30-2011, 11:54 AM
The board does not secretly control anything, it does not even openly control anything! When the board was first discussed, it was decided one group of 5 would be the number we would use, 4 elected and Rick. Any group can choose any number they like, that is what this group chose. We could always change the number of boards or members per board if there was a need. So to answer the question, 5 is not the magic number, it is our number. Some people choose to have one car, some people choose to have 5. There is no right or wrong, it is just their decision.

It is not mandatory that any member or moderator only consult the board, they can consult anyone. I have asked moderation questions to non-board members, and even to people who do not belong to the site. But it's nice they are there to ask when I do want to. On other occasions, members have contacted me with suggestions which I welcome as well.

There have been a few changes to the site which were presented to the board as opposed to the entire group because the issue did not need the entire site's input. Examples would be the addition of the photo gallery, the new articles menu, and the Pathtags. A larger group can argue their points for months and never come to a consensus. On matters of little importance, this is a waste of time, especially for issues like the articles menu which can be edited easily to adjust for future needs.

So if I came out with an idea for this site and the board neither find it important or find it important to consult the entire site, it's lost even the rest of the site would like it. Thanks for clarification. I don't have any other questions regarding the board.

brdad
01-30-2011, 12:01 PM
So if I came out with an idea for this site and the board neither find it important or find it important to consult the entire site, it's lost even the rest of the site would like it. Thanks for clarification. I don't have any other questions regarding the board.

For one, that's why you elect board members who want what is best for the site, secondly, you always have the option of bypassing the board and posting right to the forums as many members have, including myself.

attroll
01-30-2011, 12:33 PM
Keep in mind that we are not an official club of any type. The advisory board is no only for Geocaching Maine as a group. It is also for the web site and to help keep it organized and to help with any immediate decisions that need to be made for the web site or the group in general. If we left it up to a discussion in the forums it would take weeks or months or even longer to get resolved. In some cases an answer is needed within days or less.

TRF
01-30-2011, 01:47 PM
Keep in mind that we are not an official club of any type. The advisory board is no only for Geocaching Maine as a group. It is also for the web site and to help keep it organized and to help with any immediate decisions that need to be made for the web site or the group in general. If we left it up to a discussion in the forums it would take weeks or months or even longer to get resolved. In some cases an answer is needed within days or less.

As JustKev said there has been no harm so no foul. If Attroll likes to bounce ideas off of an advisory board to administer this site then I can see no issue. I would abstain from a vote in this matter as it has little impact on Geocaching in Maine and as for how Attroll chooses to brainstorm and add or delete content is totally up to him. I think it is admirable actually that he has found a successful way to harness ideas and advice to keep this site fresh.

I think there has existed an implication that the "Advisory Board" is an official voice for Maine geocachers which is not the case. It has been made very clear, adamantly in fact, that the board simply wishes to confine itself to the operations of the forums and the GeocachingMaine.org site. With that said, the past and present board members have done that job well.

WhereRWe?
01-30-2011, 06:34 PM
I think there has existed an implication that the "Advisory Board" is an official voice for Maine geocachers which is not the case. It has been made very clear, adamantly in fact, that the board simply wishes to confine itself to the operations of the forums and the GeocachingMaine.org site. With that said, the past and present board members have done that job well.

True, very true. And I hope you checked the link I provided regarding the discussions when the Advisory board was set up (cannot be accessed by most members, but TRF can...) That should refresh your memory and clarify a lot. :D:D

surfacewarrior
01-30-2011, 11:16 PM
after working all weekend and just now being able to catch up on the forum it seems that some folks just want to cause hate and discontent. the reason for a 4 person ADVISORY board is that Rick would like a SMALL cross section of the members to bounce Ideas off of when any member brings something to him just to insure he is getting a well rounded perspective it seems to me. and while I am very new on the site some folks seem to make me wonder why rick does not just shut the site down and open a facebook page with like minded geocachers. I for one would not like that because I have learned a lot from just reading old threads and seeing the new trends on the forums. sory if I have upset any one that is not my intent just my observation in the past 1/2 hour of catching up.

JustKev
01-31-2011, 11:38 PM
26 votes. 21 for and 5 against. I think we can call this myth busted.

dufzor
01-31-2011, 11:52 PM
The other option would be to farm out the advisory board to who ever McAfee farmed out their customer support to. Good grief.
Ain't that the truth! Spent forever explaining that if I have a 3 pc subscription, that leaves 2 more pcs after I intall on one! It took them a while but they decided to work with me on this "issue". :eek:

JustKev
01-31-2011, 11:59 PM
Ain't that the truth! Spent forever explaining that if I have a 3 pc subscription, that leaves 2 more pcs after I intall on one! It took them a while but they decided to work with me on this "issue". :eek:

I have the 3 PC license, have it installed on 3 PC's and upgraded from 32 bit to 64 bit on one, which results in a format of the hard drive. Upon reinstalling it took me several minutes to get them to understand I still only have their product installed on 3 PC's. :eek: