|
Post by Christmas Chief on Nov 16, 2011 17:06:04 GMT -5
Well, naturally I think we should hear Tragedy's opinion on all this. But in light of upcoming events - not the least of which is Snicket's new series - I agree that it feels appropriate to establish more dependable leadership within the community, if only to control a potential influx of new members, a sudden need for new sections, or guidance in future decision-making.
|
|
|
Post by bryan on Nov 16, 2011 18:50:09 GMT -5
Perhaps you could just be a co-admin to start out? And then see how that works? Is that even possible?
Also, I feel like Willis and FD are the same person. Or that Willis told FD to post that. But oh well.
|
|
|
Post by csc on Nov 16, 2011 19:48:57 GMT -5
Hey! We are not the ssame person and he did not tell me to post that. I thought he was joking at first, so the whole "detailed list" thing was a joke too. Only I found out later that this is no joke.
|
|
|
Post by bryan on Nov 16, 2011 19:50:00 GMT -5
Haha oh okay.
|
|
|
Post by BSam on Nov 16, 2011 21:28:34 GMT -5
I back willis 99%
|
|
|
Post by Emma “Emmz” Squalor on Nov 17, 2011 10:24:40 GMT -5
I agree with Sherry Ann that Tragedy should be contacted and given a chance to state his feelings on this. If he can no longer afford to dedicate the necessary time it takes to be admin, then that's okay. It happens and is perfectly understandable. But it's vital that 667 have someone in charge who can make a full-time commitment to the board and its members.
|
|
|
Post by csc on Nov 17, 2011 10:30:58 GMT -5
I agree with Emma.
|
|
|
Post by B. on Nov 17, 2011 12:04:16 GMT -5
I agree with Sherry Ann that Tragedy should be contacted and given a chance to state his feelings on this. If he can no longer afford to dedicate the necessary time it takes to be admin, then that's okay. It happens and is perfectly understandable. But it's vital that 667 have someone in charge who can make a full-time commitment to the board and its members. Aye,here here, Aye!
|
|
|
Post by Leanora Crowe on Nov 17, 2011 15:07:09 GMT -5
I agree with Emma and Sherry Ann as well.
I'm not sure, however, that Willis should be the only person to "run against" Tragedy. Not that I have a problem with Willis - by no means is that true - I just feel that to have more options would be helpful in the decision-making process for other members.
I, too, find it interesting that Dante hasn't commented here...
|
|
|
Post by Hermes on Nov 17, 2011 15:18:35 GMT -5
Bear in mind we can't replace Tragedy without his consent - the site belongs to him. Now, it may be that he would in fact be happy to stand down. In that case we could choose his successor by election (if he was OK with that). But I think Willis has rather jumped the gun by offering himself as a candidate before we know that an election is happening. It runs together the questions of whether Tragedy should be replaced and who the new admin should be. I can think of several other people who might be good candidates; but it wouldn't be reasonable to expect them to declare themselves before an election is even called. So I think we should wait.
I don't see that Dante is in any way obliged to take a position on what is at the moment a very indeterminate question.
|
|
|
Post by Invisible on Nov 17, 2011 15:27:12 GMT -5
I agree with Emma.
|
|
|
Post by csc on Nov 17, 2011 15:59:39 GMT -5
Bear in mind we can't replace Tragedy without his consent - the site belongs to him. Now, it may be that he would in fact be happy to stand down. In that case we could choose his successor by election (if he was OK with that). But I think Willis has rather jumped the gun by offering himself as a candidate before we know that an election is happening. It runs together the questions of whether Tragedy should be replaced and who the new admin should be. I can think of several other people who might be good candidates; but it wouldn't be reasonable to expect them to declare themselves before an election is even called. So I think we should wait. I don't see that Dante is in any way obliged to take a position on what is at the moment a very indeterminate question. That's true. Before we begin naming leaders and new admins and starting elections, Tragedy must be notified and consent. If he doesn't wish to step down, personally, I don't have a problem with that. In the moment, 667 Dark Avenue is doing just fine, I gather.
|
|
|
Post by B. on Nov 17, 2011 17:01:28 GMT -5
So lets call Tragedy! (that's easier said than done!)
But, if we're having an election we need more candidates. Of course it's not compulsory for Dante to comment- I just it a little strange......
And I would laugh if this turned out to be an elaborate prank
|
|
|
Post by Christmas Chief on Nov 17, 2011 18:22:54 GMT -5
In the moment, 667 Dark Avenue is doing just fine, I gather. Well, yes, but the concern here is the future - 667 is anticipating a lot more activity within the next year given Snicket's new series, and an inactive admin simply won't do. Although you raise a good point: perhaps Tragedy is only as active as his forum is. (And it seems Dante has, in fact, taken a position ... although why it's curious he, rather than some other member, hasn't responded in this particular thread eludes me.)
|
|
|
Post by csc on Nov 17, 2011 19:33:43 GMT -5
It seems so. But the line under his avatar might just be a joke. Dante usually isn't the joker kind, though.
|
|