How would you reorganize our SaidIt community?

submitted by JasonCarswell from (self.SaidItCommunity)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BISH 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

Who gets to decide who is breaking the rules, and who gets a strike?

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

I've suggested many times before that SaidIt needs a Trusted Team while also being open to public input. To be fair, M7 and others have said that if you had a dedicated sub for holding trials it would become mud slinging chaos. I don't believe that is true at all. Sure you would have some regular mudslingers, some others on occasion, as well as anon alts attempting to skew things, but patterns would emerge and you could take opinions with a grain of source.

However, that's for SaidIt.
This is for the civil invite-only forum...

If everyone is already invited for their civility there shouldn't be much of a problem. People could state their views of support or objection (or abstain to avoid drama and timesuck) and collectively we'd reach some conclusions.

How are the conclusions to be arrived at? To be determined by the community. For example there are different ways to decide on an action: 1) >50% votes wins, 2) >66% votes wins, 3) other specified percentages, 4) 100% consensus. Another question: How many of the community would need to weigh in? Perhaps there are other ways besides voting.

Maybe just a smaller Trusted Team or Community Council or Steering Committee would be satisfactory to everyone for all the decision making - IMO as long as it's all 100% open (transparent and anyone can have input if they aren't in the core). The point is that everyone should want to be civil (however we define this) and not want to bother the community with custodial matters.

By starting with exemplary civilized folks there won't be "offences", thereafter they would collectively decide how to invite people (ie. vote for or against individuals, groups, or lists up for consideration for a time period (as was done at my parents' yacht club for new memberships)), and the community may in time widen the recruitment to involve less-reserved folks. Ideally this would be slowly rolled out as the guidelines are built up over time with behavioural examples to emulate or avoid.

Thanks for the good question.
Getting this discussion going was the purpose of this post.

[–]BISH 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I've suggested many times before that SaidIt needs a Trusted Team

I just so happen to be a "Trusted_Team".

[–]Trusted_Team 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Checking in.

[–]BISH 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

What up Playboy?!

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Hired!

[–]BISH 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

😁