[MD] Changes in 2011

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

This has been tried numerous times, and each time the discussion
seemed to flounder and die. I'd suggest something a little different:

1) Membership limited to:
       A) 12 members - each member takes one month as moderator
       B) Invitation only to fill vacancies
       C) New members approved by 5 member committee

2) Members promise to make good faith effort at answering every post
addressed to them to the best of their abilities.

3) If a member fails to post for 30 consecutive days, they are dropped
from the discussion group.

4) Waiting list is established to fill vacancies by recommendations of
present members. Any member can nominate anyone they wish.

5) Last five days of the month, the next moderator picks three topics
to be discussed, and why they think each will further the discussion.
5 member committee approves one by majority vote.

6) 5 member committee made up by the next five months and the
moderators assigned to them. Each month one member drops out and
another is added. This way every member participates in the committee
over the course of a year.

7) To begin, applications will be accepted outlining why the member
believes they belongs, and how they can add to the discussion. If
there are more than 12 members applying, the first 12 members are
chosen by tenure. Each member is assigned a month by Horse drawing
names.

What does everyone think about this?

Any additions to this list are welcome.

Thank you,

Dan

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Magnus Berg <McMagnus at home.se> wrote:
> Hi Horse
>
> One option could be to relaunch the moderated MoQ Focus list. I'd be
> interested. Perhaps it doesn't even need to be moderated if we can't get a
> decent list of moderators (and with decent, I mean quantity, not quality).
>
> The noise level on MD is a tad too much for me to muster for very long at a
> time.
>
>        Magnus
>
>
>
>
> On 2011-01-03 19:58, Horse wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ian
>>
>> Happy New Year to you too - and to all the rest of you.
>>
>> I'm not making the term Reification taboo any more than I have made the
>> terms SOM or Intellect or Intellectual or similar terms taboo. They're
>> just words.
>> What I am doing though is killing the whole SOM as Intellect debate and
>> any avenues that lead towards it. Marsha's Reification is, from my point
>> of view, just another way of expressing that debate.
>>
>> Something else that I would like to see emerge in 2011 is a debate about
>> Politics and the MoQ. This is something that really hasn't occurred here
>> yet - I think the reasons are obvious - but maybe I will be able to
>> facilitate this during the coming year.
>> In case anyone is thinking of jumping in about here, could I please ask
>> you to hold on for a while (that's a polite request) as I would like to
>> make sure that the general level of debate is back to it's usual caustic
>> levels first!
>>
>> One thing that I have been putting a lot of thought into recently is how
>> to balance the right to speak freely with the right to be heard.
>> It's a tricky one - how do you balance the interests of those that don't
>> scream and shout the loudest with those that do?
>> Who upholds the rights of those who wish to have moderate and reasonable
>> debate?
>>
>> Hmmm!
>>
>> Horse
>>
>>
>>
>> On 03/01/2011 09:34, Ian Glendinning wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Horse,
>>>
>>> Glad to see MD is not a democracy, but as I've consistently said any
>>> good democracy has good regulation too. You have my support.
>>>
>>> One observation on the edict itself. The term reification cannot
>>> itself be made taboo (I hope, it has valid uses in our discussion - eg
>>> misplaced concreteness of named objects), but in this context, as a
>>> rhetorical cover for SOLAQI etc ... then the point is clear.
>>>
>>> Happy new year BTW,
>>> Ian
>>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>