|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 16:34:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 09/06/2008 16:37:04
Originally by: Inanna Zuni
I am quite happy that a Chair should be able to warn a member that they have done something clearly *wrong* but in both cases, as I had not (indeed past meetings have had comments from others clearly disruptive to the smooth flow of the meeting) I asked for a clarification of what I was supposed to have done and what a "warning" actually signified.
I had clearly explained the process in the previous meeting:
[ 2008.05.31 19:26:41 ] Jade Constantine > let me address the muting stuff [ 2008.05.31 19:26:59 ] Jade Constantine > As chair I would take the following steps on moderation: [ 2008.05.31 19:27:09 ] Jade Constantine > if somebody is disruptive I'd ask them to stop [ 2008.05.31 19:27:20 ] Jade Constantine > if they don't stop I'll eventually give a warning [ 2008.05.31 19:27:25 ] Jade Constantine > then a second warning [ 2008.05.31 19:27:33 ] Jade Constantine > then use the mute function outside of voting [ 2008.05.31 19:27:43 ] Jade Constantine > I hope these are steps that will never be needed
(this led to a vote on the principle of operator rights that confirmed that CSM officers would maintain operator rights)
Yesterday I took your request for re-clarification of this statement on record to be spurious and again an attempt to prevent the vote in progress from coming to a conclusion.
Quote: Instead of getting answers to my questions (and neither did others get responses when they asked) I was muted and locked out of the discussion. imho far exceeding any 'authority' that the Chair may have.
The discussion was over. We'd moved to the vote. You were not locked out of the discussion. You were muted to prevent you continuing to obstruct the process of the vote. As you can see from the timing of the log I attempted to un-mute you the moment after I formally called for voting preferences.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 17:10:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Aprudena Gist
You're grasping at straws if you think any amount of silencing a person on that council for any circumstance is acceptable.
Obviously I disagree with you. (I'm disagreeing with a lot of goons today it seems).
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 22:12:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Jita Jolene All that needs to happen here is for the CSM who do not have the floor to SHUT UP, until the Chair gives them the floor. That is the essence of their job. If the Chair fails to fairly grant the floor, ask CCP to replace them.
Looking at the logs, it is obvious half of the group have no clue how to behave in a text meeting. The next meeting should have Jade directly giving the floor to an individual, priority based on the item list sponsor as a primary speaker and secondarily to impromptu requests for the floor. In all cases the only interruption is a ! in the chat.
Abuse and repeated interjection would be the only justification for muting. In the case of this meeting, it was chaos from the start due to people feeling anarchy was the mode and nobody was their boss. Somebody is different, and that is the chairman. They sort the traffic.
Word to the chairman: Never paraphrase the content of a vote. Cut and paste verbatim.
Word to the committee: Shush till you have the floor!
Sounds like a good idea to me. I'll try my best to make sure this happens.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 23:07:00 -
[4]
I can't believe you are still arguing about this seriously. Get a sense of perspective already! I muted a member of the CSM. Yep I did it! I was the moderator (Chair) for a live discussion in a chat channel that lasted 4 hours and near the end of that time I ended up taking a decision that was backed by my (Vice Chair) to temp mute a CSM rep for as long as it took me to state the terms we were voting on. HINT: (while the chair is stating terms for a vote people are not supposed to be talking in channel ANYWAY). If you look at the log you'll see that first mute notification when I clicked mute. You'll see me state the terms of the vote and say "now vote!" and you'll see a second mute notification (that was actually through ccp's twisted logic) me clicking "un-mute" being recorded as a "kick from channel".
What followed was people voting and then us wondering where the muted CSM rep had gone (thinking of course that it was quick duration mute/unmute) not a bloody channel kick. Froth and emoism followed.
So ultimately here's the story.
1 CSM Chair (with responsibility to moderate a meeting) 2. Moderates the meeting. 3. Moderation involves a temp mute that goes horribly wrong due to ccp bugs. 4. Muted rep is un-muted and given the option to vote.
10,000 alts and forum trolls cry about it on the forum.
Good heavens, talk about a pathetic over-reaction to a routine matter of moderating a chat channel. I've been in meetings of caffeine-crazed stock-brokers being told they aren't getting their full Christmas bonus that involved less crying and gnashing of teeth than this topic.
|
|
|
|