Printable View
No. I know for a fact that all the members of the advisory board are very active in their discussions. Just because Brdad is the most vocal of the Advisory Board members doesn't mean that the others aren't involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxgloves
:D:D
I hereby waive any procedural or constitutional challenges!;)
I stand corrected. I had forgotten about the pre-poll post on the 23rd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxgloves
Wow, I never expected that comment, not sure if that's a good thing or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxgloves
As Bruce says from experience serving on the board himself, I probably am the most vocal person on the board. Heck, I'm one of the most vocal people on the site. I am not, however, the board. Any posts made with the Advisory board account are presented to the entire board for discussion and editing before they are posted. Most of the time it is not posted until all members are satisfied; on rare occasion it has been only a majority. But regardless, the entire board has the opportunity to state their opinion. Once again, I am often the one to write the draft up, but it is rare when there are no edits. What can I say, I like this site, like to finish projects, have the time, and I'd like to see our site grow.
I disagree as well. Brdad is the usual "voice" of the board, but does not post until we are united on the idea of the post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxgloves
(And I have almost never seen him walk like a duck, but if you have a video... :p )
Actually I screwed up my post but couldn't edit it...I meant to say:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sudonim
"If it Walks like a duck, TALKS like a duck then its probably a duck"
My personal opinion is that BRDAD fits that bill (no pun intended) :p
My opinion is not going to change.
Now back to the discussion...........
Not to condone Chadd’s behavior on this site but he has made some interesting observations and I have to agree with him on a few things….. This site will never grow under the current panel.
If you want the respect of people on this site you might try being a little more communicative instead of being so secretive about everything. You should have posted back in November that the election process for a new advisory board would be postponed due to Rick’s adjustment back to civilization after his nine month absence from the site. I think most people would have understood. Thats all you had to do…is be open about it. Instead you had your excuse all made up and ready to go just in case you needed it. Its almost as if you were hoping no one would remember it was 2010 and that a new advisory board was up for renewal.
The current board needs to be renewed. It has really gotten stale. Every thread gets derailed within three posts. No one can stay on topic. Karen’s winter camping thread today is a good example of an excellent thread with opportunity for good discussion and information but already I see it getting derailed…..it seems to be a common occurance on this site and this site has turned into nothing more than a bulletin board with what people had for dinner last night.
People are tired of hearing one person’s same ole same ole opinion of what geocaching is and what it isn’t. We already know how you feel BRDAD. Stop beating the dead horse.
You have to have the last word on every post or until the post ends in your favor. You are not the Godfather of geocaching. Believe it or not your $.02 is not worth anymore than anyone elses $.02.
Now…. in support of a few people who I think would be assets to the board.
We have:
Fins_Up (Jason): If I remember correctly he has young children and is actively involved in geocaching. A perspective of geocaching with young kids and the challenges that go with it in terms of keeping them interested in this hobby/sport.
Team2hunt (Gary) He was a trainer and has the experience of talking to groups of people and educating them. He would be an added bonus to the panel because he is willing to go out and speak to groups that might benefit geocaching as a whole. He is comfortable doing that.
Dubord (Dan) We have a lawyer that knows some of the legality issues we sometimes face dealing with property owners and land management groups. That’s a good person to have on the panel.
We need a diversified group with different talents and backgrounds who are willing to make a difference and set a good example for geocachers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxgloves
I believe it was already determined that attempts to keep threads on track and "moderate" them has nothing to do with the board, but is the job of the sites moderators. This seems to be something that most aren't grasping.
OK, ok...we all get it. This whole process was late getting started (get over it) but that has been rectified and we now know who is "in the running." It's time to list all of the candidates and let us vote on our four top choices.
And to the new Advisory Board (whomever you are) I would ask that one of your first items to consider is this "Board Reviews" issue.
Board Reviews: In the beginning of November of even numbered years, a poll will be posted to the site asking the membership if they would like to keep the board members as is or if elections should be held to refresh the board.
This is really lame. It's an unnecessary step. Just do it! Every two years hold elections, and if the same board wants to stay on they can express their interest and if new other members want to be considered they can express their interest as well. Perhaps in the first couple of years this may have seemed OK......but the site has grown, many new members are on board, and it's time to enter the modern world.
Finally, let me ask this: four people doesn't seem like a large enough number to represent a large and diverse group like ours. With the quality of the people I have seen tossing their hat into the ring this time I'm going to feel badly about voting for only four. Would you consider six? After all, with this many people stepping forward offering to help out it's a shame not to utilize their energy and talents. Also: six people could be assigned specific duties. E.G. Two could be assigned to encourage/develop new membership; two could be assigned to work on revamping the bylaws; two could be assigned to develop moderators; two could be assigned to look at ways to improve the web site (why is this all on Rick's shoulders?) , two could be assigned to develop products to sell as a way to support the group (hats, shirts, decals, mugs, pins, pens) etc., etc.
I realize that I am suggesting we become the Maine Geocaching Association instead of just an online forum. And some of you will point that out. But is it time to take that next step? I certainly think so. This thread is intended to become familiar with the candidates for the "advisory board." I think I'm "familiar" enough and ready to vote. The question I now have is this: am I voting for enough members? And why aren't we moving forward to broaden what we do like so many other states have done?
A couple of things here that people seem to be losing sight of.
One. This is a site that Rick started and maintains, usually at an expense beyond what he gets for donations, and as such it should follow the basic premise he wants it to. It seems to me that the majority of the users here are okay with that. The people who don't like the way the site is aren't necessarily wrong, they just might want to consider starting a site themselves and implement policies that satisfy their needs.
Two. The board is very active behind the scenes doing what they feel is good for this site as well as geocaching here in Maine. It doesn't have to be out in the open throughout that process. Just because BRDAD is the "mouthpiece" for the board and a moderator as well it doesn't mean he's running the site. Rick is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EMSDanel
I had hinted in earlier threads and post to precisely what you are asking here. The "scope" of the board was and is a valid question to ask the candidates. I hope you get a few pm's of a similar nature that I had gotten and those alone will make it clear that some members are very resistant to explore those `"broader view' options.
Again, a valid question EMSDanel and I hope it is taken in the context that it was meant and not regarded as confrontational.
Sheesh! That is exactly what we have now! LOL! :D:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Foxgloves