Community Political Structure

[COBOLdinosaur]

In any organization where there is a division of power those vested with power need checks and balances to keep them from abusing the power. The checks and balances are embedded in a political structure, and its effectivness is dependent on broad participation.

So let's look at roles of the positions on the site that have some part in running the site:

Site Administrator Appointed by the site owner.  De facto member of the Governing Council and all groups.  Has some exclusive access to controls and privilege settings on the site. Has a veto on financial and legal issues.

Governing Council The legislators of the site.  They make the rules, set standards, settle disputes among mentors, and are the final authority on suspensions/bannings.  They gain their positions through elections (term of office yet to be determined).

Mentors They run the topic areas on a day to day basis, and are the final authority on technical issues. Mentors attain their position based on merit and peer review,

Forum Administrators Manage the organization and privileges of the topic categories in consultation with the Mentors.  May assist Mentors in topic management.  They have the authority to implement disciplinary action including suspensions for members below the rank of Mentor; subject to review by the Site Administrator and the Governing Council.  They attain their position by appointment of the Site Administrator in consultation with the Governing Council.

Editors Manage content flow in the topics, assist the Mentors in quality assurance, and generate the content for some articles.  Editors attain their position by appointment of the Site Administrator, in consultation with the Mentors and Forum Administrators.

Moderators If at some point a moderator position become necessary they will be responsible for the enforcement of site rules under the direction of the Mentors. They will be appointed by the Site Administrator in consultation with the Mentors and Forum Administrators.

The political role of all other members is to vote in elections and on issues.

Elections:

The length of the term of office will be decided by a general vote before the first election.
Any member my run for a seat on the Governing Council, simply by declaring their intention to do so and requesting to be put on the ballot in the appproriate section.  The sections will be Mentors(5 seats) Contributing Members (3 seats) Members (2 seats).  Each member will have a vote in the section where they qualify.  Site builders will have one vote in each section.  The editor of teh Ballot Forum will be the final autority for issues of alleged improper behaviour that affects the outcome of elections.

Council Voting and Procedures:

Issues that require a debate and vote by the Council are public, and the Council will start threads for the purpose of getting community input as part of the process of legislating.  All members have a right to address the Council on issues that affect them.  All votes by Council are final and binding except when the Site Administrator exercises a veto to protect the financial of legal position of the site. Rules passed by the Council can only be modified or recinded by another vote of the Council.

Council may from time to time determine that an issue is important enough to warrant special attention in which case they may appoint one or more members to investigate and report on the issue.

Council may determine that an issue is of such criticality that a general vote is required in which case they will submit the question to the ballot Editor who will conduct a poll.  The Council may designate such polls as Advisory or Binding when submitting it to the Ballot Editor.  

Council has within its jurisdiction the power to make any procedural rules that it deems necessary for the smooth conduct of its business.  Such procedural rules expire at the end of the Council term but may be renewed by a new Council upon taking office.

General Votes:

General votes are site wide votes in which each member has one vote.  The intermediate vote totals will not be made available and the totals shall not be made known until the period for voting has expired. The ballot editor is responsible for the conduct of general votes and is exempt from all orders from Council as far as such orders relate to the management of polls.

Local rules and conventions within a forum are the responsibility of the Mentors subject to guidelines or site wide rules the Council set.

The Site Administrator has a veto on all legislation that involves the financial dealings or legal position of the site.  The Council may ask for details that justify the veto, and the review of such justification shall be incamera.

Where an issue arrises that has not been addressed in rules or guidelines approved by the Council, the Site Administrator or their designate is authorized to take the action they deem necessary until such time as the Council ratifies the action making it part of the rules of the site or passes a replacement policy.  In all events where the Site Administrator or their designate finds it necessary to take such action the details of the situation and action taken shall be provided to the Council, and optionally a recommendation for permanent policy.

[nicholassolutions]

They attain their position by appointment of the Site Administrator in consultation with the Governing Council.

This (and directly analagous statements in regard to each position) is the only part that gives me pause. What does "in consultation" mean exactly? If the Admin picks someone, and the Council  (or Mentors, depending on the case) uniformally objects, what then? I'm going to refrain from writing an opus on the question myself, because I assume you may have something specific in mind and I don't want to turn this into one of "those" discusssions  :wink:

[keneso]

Each member will have a vote in the section where they qualify. Site builders will have one vote in each section.

I don't understand this part, could you please elaborate on the sections?

And I would do the elections w/o candidacy, making all members eligible, and all electors.
I understand that even now, all can be eligible as long as they "declare" so, and that is the part I would change, the members of the council should be elected by their history, and not by what they say in the "campaign"

Quote:
They attain their position by appointment of the Site Administrator in consultation with the Governing Council.

I see it that the admin proposes one, and the council consults about the pro and cons of the proposed name, after which, like every other consultation on this site brings to a vote, and the majority's decision will be followed; so if all the council disapproves, I'd guess the admin has to change the nominee.

[COBOLdinosaur]

In consultation means that before the appointment the Site Administrator discusses the appointment to see if there are serious objections to the appointment.  As the appointees have to work with the Council and Mentors it would not be a good idea to appoint someone who is going to have issues with the Council or Mentors.  The consultation is basically a mattr of PMing the Council members and Mentors, not public examination of the appointment.  These are positions that need to be inddpendent of political processes otherwise you get decision being made and actions being taken based on who voted for who and who support who.  The consultation is not for the purpose of final selection.  It is for the purpose of avoiding creating situations that lead to conflict.

I don't understand this part, could you please elaborate on the sections?

Within the community there are three groups of members: Mentors, Contributing Members(coaches,advisors), and regular members.

Every one runs and votes in their own section an advisor cannot run as a Mentor, but they acan run as a contributin member and that is also the section they vote in.  The site builders because of there contribution to getting the site started have a special place and get a vote in each section.

the members of the council should be elected by their history, and not by what they say in the "campaign"

How voters decide on to to vote for is their personal decision.  Some voter may vote stupidly, but it is their right to do so.  You cannot tell people how they are to decide on a vote.  As no candidates.  How do you propose that you make a member take part in Council activities.  You could easily end up with a council in which none of the members is participating.  Even with candidates having to declare that they want to run, it is likely that some will become inactive before their term in office is complete.

[Analyst]

If this has been answered elsewhere, please ignore, and I will find it eventually in an earlier thread...

There is a life other than computers and the Internet.  Sooner or later a responsible individual must set priorities on the 24/7 time.  To help set those priorities, some sort of "what's in it for me" question must be answered.  Is it anticipated that all work on the site will be done on a volunteer basis, indefinitely?  Or, has there been thought given to some sort of commercial structure eventually, including paid positions?

In the "real" world I have noted that volunteers, as a class, tend to have all sorts of motivations that can lead to such ugly things as power struggles and even embezzlement of funds.

[COBOLdinosaur]

I hope we never have to go to paid positions.  Site like this who have paid staff tend to end up with nice  people becoming arrogant jerks because they suddenly see themselves as being above the unpaid "peons".  

Paid positions also implies a substantial revenue stream which will mena the site has become commercialized.  While it will be necessary to pay the bills at some point; especially as the site gets more expensive to run, we do not want to turn it into a billboard or whore house.  There are several small revenue streams that have potential to pay the bills.  The most promising being sponsored forums.

As to financial incentives for Mentors.  There will be free hosting, and custom member pages that will allow self promotion, or business promotion, and it is possible that at some point the Council might support some kind of store where products and services produced by Mentors could be made available.

However my experience with the kind of people that work on these kinds of sites it that payment is really a disincentive.  Any top-expert on the established sites can do it for money on rentacoder, elance and others.  Thre are already many opportunities for a skill IT pro to make money on the 'net so the fact that they choose to do volunteer support instead goes a long way in indicating that $$$ is not a primary motivator.

[Analyst]

In the thread started by Huntress I suggested having an advisory board consisting of members with extensive computer applications experience who either don't have current programming skills or can't readily free up time to use them.

Such a board could be structured to have an impressive PR effect, if needed.  Also, it need not have any voting rights.  It would be strictly that - ADVISORY.

Some might think of a position on that board as being only honorary.  I think potential clients and/or seed money people might view the site as having people available who could provide a solid foundation.  In other words - credibility.

[COBOLdinosaur]

seed money people

Scares the hell right of me.

It is what started the destruciton of EE; ended the life of Askme; and is turning many of the most useful small forums into honkytonks.  

It is not reasonable to expect volunteers to carry out a mission that has a primary purpose of generating wealth for overseers.  The biggest problem I have seen is not that the working group resent the owner making a profit; but that the policy of the sites change to require behaviours on the part of the volunteers to maximize profit; and the working group does resent that.

[COBOLdinosaur]

However the idea of an Advisory Board has some merit.  Though I think it would have to be sought by the elected Governing Council.  An Advisory Board would have no on to advise unless the decision making body created such a board for the purpose.

[Cleo]

"Governing Council The legislators of the site. They make the rules, set standards, settle disputes among mentors, and are the final authority on suspensions/bannings. They gain their positions through elections (term of office yet to be determined)."

I think a Governing Counsil is an excellent idea, though if I understand it right it consists of 10 members. I would suggest that it be an odd number of either 9 or 11.  There will be times when all the Council may not agree on an issue brought before it, with an odd number making the decision you will always have a determining number pro or con.

[Huntress]

10 members plus 1 admin makes 11.

[Cleo]

Sorry I missed that, the Council automatically had an Admin as well as the other 10. #-o  :oops: .  I'm all good then. :lol:

[COBOLdinosaur]

I'm all good then

You certainly are. :D