akitson wrote:
Quote:
Quote:

I, for one, am against these proposals for the following reasons:

Re (a): There is no need to change the transitory XOOPS Project Manager or transitory Chair of the XOOPS Council as we have one now, phppp. JMorris's position would also be transitory. I believe that phppp must be given a chance to put his ideas before the community as a whole, not just a few of the old guard (who, in my opinion, bear much of the responsibility for the state that XOOPS fell into prior to phppp's stepping up to the line). As far as I know, phppp is not beholden to any of the former movers and shakers here at XOOPS. He was not involved in the political back biting that characterized the previous two regimes here, and as such has my trust.

Re (c): Replace "JMorris" with "phppp" in this sentence, and I'd agree with it.

So, I say that while a slightly revised point (c) is a valid and good idea, I stand firm in my belief that point (a) is the wrong way to go.

I'd like to draw your attention to the later part of this post, where I think I accurately described the situation as stands, and where things are going (arriving at that conclusion by distilling the information in the threads and topics within this forum).

If there is dissatisfaction with phppp's adherence (or lack of) to previously set protocol, I'd first ask if said standards are applicable right now. Further, I'd suggest that the correct course of action would be to directly approach him here and ask him to explain himself.

Excuse me for using the word, but I think that XOOPS is in the midst of a 'revolution' in thinking. I think that the 'top' is not listening to the 'bottom' and that what is most needed right now is clarification of intent from phppp rather than a reflex reaction in the dangerous direction towards cronyism (For non native English speakers: cronyism in this context is the practice of favoring one's close friends, especially in political appointments).

XOOPS is, in my opinion, in desperate need of a fundamental review of it's management systems and structures if it is to remain relevant and meet the challenges it is bound to face it the future. With this in mind, a transitory period under an apparently benign and well intentioned dictator is by and far preferable to yet another provincially minded management team. I believe that, at this moment in time, all coding should be secondary to this basic need.

Finally, I'd like to say that putting forward a vote of no confidence is, of course, your right, but one tends to find that if a no-confidence vote fails, the proposer, having expressed his obvious lack of confidence, is morally obliged to resign all claims to an authoritative voice. Do you really want to go there?

Crip

kc0maz wrote:
Quote:

phppp wrote:
Quote:

tom wrote:
Quote:

Why confused? Why sarcastic?

kc0maz asked if his synopsis was close to accurate, phppp said it was. phppp said nothing about the team being 'official'

As has been written many times in this forum, this is a transitory period. As far as I can see, none of the teams are 'official' until the structure of XOOPS as a whole has been sorted, and then, presumably, some form of elected authority will take the reigns and confirm/reject (in the best interest of XOOPS and with due consideration to the wishes of the whole community. Devs, Contributors and End Users alike) which teams are official as stand, and which need changes made.

This doesn't mean you can't get on with whatever it is you're doing out there (I see you're a member of the transitory Council, and leader of the transitory Communications Team). In fact the results of your work will sway opinion when it comes to sanctioning or otherwise your teams and your roles in them, just like everyone else.

Welcome to the transitory period

If I've misinterpreted the process as laid out above, I'm sure you'll let me know.

Crip

Don't let the b***ers grind you down, BlueStocking.

Quote:

Fair comment (hope you weren't having one of those discussions with your sheriff).

So, a permanent marker showing the mod as being such. Suppose that's the best way all things considered.

Crip

My only concern with using a regular nik for moderators would be that if s/he wanted to get partisan on some topic, everyone would assume that they were talking as a mod.

When I go to work I put on a suit and tie (well, I don't but some do), when I discuss beers with the boys, I don't.

If a mod could log in either as "Bob" or "Bob the Mod" then maybe that would allow them a bit of freedom.

Are mods supposed to be wearing their mod-cap everytime they log in? Grief, how sad if that's the case. No chance to express an opinion, everyone watching their Ps & Qs when ever they're in a forum with you. Bit like being a copper, but at least coppers get to take their uniforms off at weekends...

Crip

Quote:

Maybe that's what I'm trying to say in the proposal, gtop00.
While we were all out there in the forums getting hot and bothered, it sure didn't feel like there was any way for us to pop our heads through the door and say "Erm, 'scuse me govn'r, the peasants would like a word."

All those horrible, internecine "she did this and he did that" forum posts between our erstwhile leaders created so much noise that the ordinary users didn't have a chance. Even when they did chime in with "Guys!, Are you listening?".

As I said earlier, Quote:
and I mean that. Goodness, it's not like anyone wants to go knocking on doors, cap in hand. But if the time comes again when thing look to be getting silly again, surely better to have a system set up for it. Who knows, the various teams might come to us and say "We've got this new feature we want to try out. Can you find us some guinneapigs?" or "Hey, can you find out what the users think about this?"...

We're still developing this idea, and I for one, am much appreciative of the input so far. More please.

Crip

Quote:

Actually, I don't see this as a leadership situation really. The end-users don't need leading, they need representation. We are quite able to express for ourselves what we want, but it's the need to make sure that our voices are heard that led me to say that a 'Team' would be good.

Quote:
and
Quote:

If we really do have a community of 40,000, then I don't think 10 or so teams (80~100 people?) is really too many for the amount of work required.

Quote:
This is a fair comment. I'm still thinking about it. Maybe the problem is that if you guys are all busy doing your jobs, you're hardly going to have time to get out of your own forums to notice an underlying trend scattered over a dozen or more open forums.

Quote:
I think it's about allowing people to concentrate. Assuming that you all have real lives and more important things to do, the clearer and more defined a role is, the easier it is to accomplish in a limited amount of time.

More later.

Crip

Quote:

Indeed. edited.

Quote:

Should have kept my mouth shut... meeting/report once a month? Take on a forum somewhere for input? Yup, reckon I can manage that.
Before making that official though, let's wait a few days and see what else gets added to this thread.

Crip

I trust I'm not intruding. I apologize in advance for the length of this post. Bear with me please.

My name is Crip, I'm a 43 y/o Brit living in Japan. I've been running a XOOPS based community for foreign sailors out here for almost 3 years. It's my only experience of XOOPS, so I'm not posing as a dev or anything even remotely like it. I'm an end-user, and a fairly new one at that.

I have been following this forum since it's outset, and have made the occasional comment. I have a proposal to make, and ask that it be given consideration.

I see proposals here for the formation of the following teams:

Core-Dev Team
Module-Dev Team
Project-Council
Advisory-Team
Community-Communications (edited) Team (ex News?)
Design Team
Documentation Team
Server-Admin Team
Promotion Team
Moderators Team

Sometimes these teams are referred to as combined, sometimes separate. Sometimes in different combinations

I hope that they all spring into existence in their own rights as I think each category needs undivided attention.

I wonder if there's room for one more though.

I propose that an End-Users' Team be added to the list.

I think that while the teams listed above will give voice and direction to a large part of this community, a very important and possibly even a majority of the people involved with XOOPS will not have a direct, non technical voice in the process of building our future together.

Let me try and explain a little more clearly by breaking down the roles (as I interpret them, and as a largely "analogue" person) of the Teams listed above.

The Core-Dev Team, obviously, will be working on the XOOPS core. Fixing bugs, making improvements and mapping a future for XOOPS the app.

The Module-Dev Team, I presume, will be there to assist independent mod devs with their development of new and existing modules. They may also develop modules that are seen as essential for increasing the utility of XOOPS but which no-one seems interested in/able to develop independently. They would also, unless I'm mistaken, be responsible for assuring certain standards are met and that information on said modules would be made easily available.

The Project-Council would appear to be an over-all management team, charged with having the last word on all aspects of XOOPS, and probably a role/voice in the XOOPS foundation.

The Advisory-Team would be a team of massively experienced XOOPSers who would be a kind of oversight team both technically and ethically. These folk would probably be called upon at times of indescision/doubt, but may not be logging on every day to check in on us.

The Community-Communications (edited) Team would be in charge of making sure that each team is talking, and maybe more importantly, listening carefully to what each other are saying. They would also be collating input from the various Teams and making sure that the news section of xoops.org carried timely and open reports on all things XOOPS.

The Design Team would presumably be working on a standardized "image" for the site here at xoops.org and official sites. They may also be made available to advise on GUI and usability matters for independent module devs. I wonder if these folks will also be handling Theme guidelines and cataloging.

The Documentation Team would be in charge of making sure that documentation of the XOOPS core was thoroughly maintained and publicly available. Not sure if they would be handling module docs, maybe not seeing as how there's a Modules team. They would also be responsible for XOOPS installation docs, of course, and possibly security and hack documentation.

The Server-Admin Team would be responsible for the day to day maintenance of xoops.org . Additionally, this would probably include implementation of themes and modules deemed required here.

The Promotion Team, I assume, will be making sure that XOOPS gets the attention it deserves. Maybe it would also be charged with assisting module devs in the promotion of their modules, writers with their books and webmasters with their XOOPS built sites.

The Moderators Team would be charged with maintaining decorum on the forums and assisting posters with finding answers to their questions.

Now, I may have gotten ahold of the wrong end of the stick in some of my assumptions here, if so I bow down to your superior powers of deduction, you will no doubt feel, rightly, free to put me right I have no doubt. I'm also sure I've left glaring holes in the tasks being undertaken by the various Teams. None the less, I still see a hole that needs filling.

Let's imagine a situation arises (peril the thought) somewhat similar to what we've been experiencing the last few months. A general feeling of abandonment or alienation in the community.

Let's also imagine some less drastic and maybe more likely situations. Imagine a significant number of XOOPS users find a new implementation in the core, while technically a great idea just overly complicated from an end users point of view. Similarly, something that a near-dev might be able to handle with minimal fuss proving to be a major headache for run-of-the-mill webmasters. Maybe there's a section of the documentation that just doesn't state things clearly enough, or maybe we find that the tech requirements for installing XOOPS get ramped up to the point that we risk losing a significant number of potential new users. Maybe a module slips by the standards team and the problem goes unanswered in the forums. Basically, and with the utmost respect, I'm worried that you guys are all in XOOPS so deeply that you may at times overlook the ordinary user.

Now, with diligence and luck, it may be that none of these things ever happen, or if they do, that they get caught and dealt with by one of the Teams mentioned at the beginning of this post. Maybe there are roles that I've missed in one or other of the various teams' assignments that would make an End Users' Team largely superfluous. Maybe you really are going to open up the site to more user input and not just build it so that your decisions and actions get reported more openly. None the less, I do think it would be good to have a direct channel to the 'inner halls' for the XOOPS end user community. Reassure us, your loyal fans.

It can be intimidating expressing opinions here sometimes, hence my belief that there may be a role for a Team such as I propose. If such a team came into existence and remained silent for lack of problems, so much the better, but just in case...

Thoughts and opinions humbly requested.

Crip.

Quote:

I'd agree that the 2 teams don't need amalgamating, but would like to ask if more than one moderator (or more than one rep from each team for that matter) need to be on the co-ordination team.

Crip