Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/AMA IRC Meeting log (1-30-05)/Pt II

This is a continuation of Wikipedia:AMA IRC Meeting log (1-30-05).

[15:00] <Wally_AMA> If they're former coordinators and arbitrators, they've shown merit.
[15:00] <Sam_Spade> ic
[15:00] <Metasquares> The coordinator can... I can see either situation working
[15:00] <Sam_Spade> as a members advocate?
[15:00] <alex756> I think that the role of the Coordinator is something that the members should decide, as they have in the past.
[15:00] <alex756> What about my proposal that the elected member with the most votes becomes the new coordinator?
[15:01] <Sam_Spade> I dodn't know we had members of the arbitration commitee as members advocates?
[15:01] <Sam_Spade> former or otherwise?
[15:01] <alex756> No, actually former members of the arbitration commmitee are allowed to become members.
[15:01] <Sam_Spade> but have they?
[15:01] <Sam_Spade> not to my knowledge....
[15:01] <alex756> I was also thinking that as Coordinator that I should mention this to them.
[15:01] <Wally_AMA> I don't like that so much.
[15:02] <Wally_AMA> I think the Coordinator should be responsible to the committee; thus being elected from them.
[15:02] <alex756> Like former judges they can be very good advocates.
[15:02] <Sam_Spade> I don't like most of what I've heard, sorry to say
[15:02] <Wally_AMA> I could see it working, it's just not my preferred.
[15:02] <Sam_Spade> if it was put up for referendum, all in one, I'd be against it
[15:02] <alex756> Sam, do you think we should have a committee at all?
[15:02] <Sam_Spade> no
[15:02] <Wally_AMA> Then how should we do it?
[15:02] <Sam_Spade> I oppose commitees
[15:02] <Anthere> Wally_AMA, I'll think more about it
[15:02] <Sam_Spade> vigorously
[15:02] <Anthere> but I read what you all write
[15:03] <Metasquares> Why? Are you afraid that the presence of a committee will slow the AMA's decision making down?
[15:03] <Sam_Spade> yes
[15:03] <Sam_Spade> greatly
[15:03] <Wally_AMA> I am happy to type up a full proposal of what I might see, if that might help all concerned?
[15:03] <Sam_Spade> mine especially
[15:03] <alex756> We are going to be discussing this for a while Anthere, it will be posted on the AMA pages so we are hoping to get more member input after today.
[15:03] <Sam_Spade> ;)
[15:03] <alex756> I think we need to discuss the need of a commmittee more, I am interested in hearing sam's objections to that.
[15:03] <Sam_Spade> already your asking I keep track of what I'm doing as an advocate, which takes up at least as much time as advocating
[15:04] <alex756> Sam, I was just looking for a short general paragraph, that is all, not some kind of complex time sheet.
[15:04] <Sam_Spade> but its an example
[15:04] <alex756> Did you look at what other people wrote on the Survey page?
[15:04] <Sam_Spade> of the sort of things which come from commitees
[15:04] <alex756> I don't think it took them very long to write that.
[15:05] <Sam_Spade> people who can, do
[15:05] <Sam_Spade> yeah, I'm happy to do that
[15:05] <alex756> Can I make a statement as the present Coordinator?
[15:05] <Sam_Spade> but strict records are needed
[15:05] <Sam_Spade> we need to have a division of labour
[15:05] <Sam_Spade> sure
[15:06] <Sam_Spade> *
[15:06] <alex756> I posted messages on all 29 members talk pages a week ago, and only eight responded (including Anthere who put a suggestion on my talk page).
[15:06] <alex756> I think this shows the level of activity, several of those people that did respond have hardly done any advocacy.
[15:07] <Wally_AMA> Sam, I respectfully disagree.
[15:07] <alex756> As Coordinator it is a bit frustrating to put all the onus on that position for communicating with AMA members.
[15:07] <Wally_AMA> Asking for a brief list of what a person has been involved in is not the sort of crushing bureaucracy you seem to portray.
[15:07] <Sam_Spade> I have at least one arbitration case going, and just closed 2
[15:07] <Sam_Spade> what have you been doing?
[15:07] <alex756> It would be better if there were more than one person then the Coordinator could work with someone else and discuss AMA activities.
[15:08] <Sam_Spade> members advocate-wise?
[15:08] <Metasquares> I agree with alex756 here; this can be handled more efficiently by many people than just one
[15:08] <alex756> I am not talking about intererence with individual advocates cases, I think that advocates need to be independent of the AMA in their activities.
[15:08] <alex756> That is why I wonder why so many people mentioned "unofficial" advocacy.
[15:08] <Sam_Spade> keeping track of what I do here would double my work
[15:09] <alex756> It seems to me that whenever you advocate that is "official". There is no stamp that the AMA puts on an advocate's activities.
[15:09] <Metasquares> So all advocacy is to be considered official, even if it isn't conducted through the AMA requests for assistance?
[15:09] <Sam_Spade> I favor unofficial advocacy
[15:09] <alex756> And I don't think we need to start setting up our own disciplinary system, no one has complained yet.
[15:09] <alex756> I don't know anything about this "unoffocial" advocacy. All advocacy is advocacy.
[15:10] <alex756> Show me where we ever discussed "official" vs. "unofficial" advocacy.
[15:10] <Wally_AMA> Where disciplinary systems are concerned I figure if it comes up the committee just handles it.
[15:10] <Sam_Spade> nigel mentioned it
[15:10] <Wally_AMA> No formal system is desirable.
[15:10] <alex756> The idea for requests for assistance is for people who could not find advocates directly.
[15:10] <Metasquares> Ah
[15:10] <Sam_Spade> people copntact me directly
[15:10] <Sam_Spade> severel a week
[15:10] <alex756> That is what is says on the main page and why people have member statements.
[15:11] <Sam_Spade> any of you can contact me
[15:11] <Sam_Spade> if I don't want to jelp, I won't
[15:11] <Sam_Spade> but I usually do
[15:11] <alex756> Maybe we should make you coordinator then Sam, and you could refer some of your contacts to other advocates who haven't had much chance to help people.
[15:11] <Sam_Spade> and I don't even have a members statement ;)
[15:11] <Sam_Spade> hehe
[15:12] <Sam_Spade> I oppose coordinators, and commitees
[15:12] <Sam_Spade> I just happen to like you, alex
[15:12] <Sam_Spade> I agree that messaging every last one of us shouldn't be your job
[15:12] <alex756> I think that the Coordinator Sam should serve an organizational function, not coordinate advocacy.
[15:12] <Sam_Spade> that should be somebodies job, maybe a bots job, but not yours
[15:13] <Wally_AMA> A bot is not a person.
[15:13] <Sam_Spade> we need division of labor
[15:13] <alex756> Some of the members have suggested that we need a higher profile, more activity. I think discussion is good.
[15:13] <Sam_Spade> profile is easy
[15:13] <Sam_Spade> I could advertise you if I wanted
[15:13] <Sam_Spade> in my introductions to new members
[15:13] <Sam_Spade> or my signature
[15:13] <Sam_Spade> or main page
[15:13] <Sam_Spade> we could all do that
[15:13] <Sam_Spade> but we don't
[15:14] <Anthere> sorry, must go
[15:14] <Anthere> bye all
[15:14] <alex756> Yes, we are still a young association.
[15:14] <alex756> By anthere, hope you get a chance to read the logs.
[15:14] <Sam_Spade> goodbye anthere
[15:14] <Anthere> yes, please publish them
[15:14] <alex756> And comment later.
[15:14] <Anthere> or send them by mail
[15:14] <Metasquares> Bye
[15:14] <alex756> They will be published, like the last one.
[15:14] <Anthere> will do, I promise, today is very very busy for me
[15:14] <Anthere> good thanks
[15:15] <Wally_AMA> We don't need advertisement.
[15:15] <Wally_AMA> We're not selling shoes.
[15:15] <Sam_Spade> we need incentivce
[15:15] <Wally_AMA> Hence what the committee offers.
[15:15] <Sam_Spade> thats why people do things
[15:15] <alex756> I think what we need is more support of AMA members.
[15:15] <Wally_AMA> A chance to have a bigger part, to move up.
[15:15] <Wally_AMA> Something a pithy title cannot offer.
[15:15] <Sam_Spade> we need positions of responsibility based on merir, not seniority or elections
[15:15] <alex756> The role of being a commmittee member should be for people willing to take on responsibility, not "move up."
[15:16] <Sam_Spade> division of labour
[15:16] <Wally_AMA> To this I agree; however realism and idealism must be reconciled.
[15:16] <Wally_AMA> And who, Sam, decides who is worthy of "moving up"?
[15:16] <Sam_Spade> obvious merit
[15:16] <Wally_AMA> Who decides who has "merit"?
[15:16] <Wally_AMA> No such thing.
[15:16] <Sam_Spade> success
[15:16] <alex756> They should be willing to spend time thinking about how the AMA can be improved. How advocates can be helped, through training, meetings that discuss specific topics, etc.
[15:16] <Sam_Spade> Bull
[15:16] <Wally_AMA> What you're essentially asking for is approval by approbation.
[15:16] <Sam_Spade> very few of us do anything
[15:16] <Wally_AMA> Aka an election.
[15:17] <Sam_Spade> at all
[15:17] <Sam_Spade> not even talking on the AMA discussion page
[15:17] <Wally_AMA> But those that do are not qualified dictators by the fact.
[15:17] <alex756> I think we can have an election Sam, that is how this meeting thing got started, no?
[15:17] <Sam_Spade> a handful come here, or have advocated for anybody
[15:17] <alex756> I noticed that the only person who put something on the page for topics to discuss at this meeting was a non AMA member.
[15:18] <Sam_Spade> hehehehe
[15:18] <Sam_Spade> thats probably insightful, alex
[15:18] <alex756> Did anyone read his suggestion?
[15:18] <Sam_Spade> no
[15:18] <Metasquares> Second meeting page or first?
[15:18] <alex756> See: Wikipedia:AMA Meeting (suggested topics)
[15:18] * Sam_Spade is now known as Sam_Spadeaway
[15:19] <alex756> Actually he/her also joined the AMA
[15:20] <alex756> The suggestion was to put a link on each page to AMA policies?!
[15:20] <Wally_AMA> I think this is partly because we have so many pages.
[15:20] <alex756> I guess the suggestion was that people really don't know much about our group.
[15:20] <Wally_AMA> No one knows where to leave a suggestion.
[15:21] <alex756> I find that strange, because I have a Coodinator's page, and there have been a few suggestions, but not much.
[15:21] * Sam_Spadeaway is now known as Jack
[15:21] <alex756> Wikipedia:AMA Coordinator
[15:22] <alex756> Wally, I noticed that you did leave a question there on Dec. 31.
[15:22] * Jack is now known as Sam_Spade
[15:22] <alex756> And there was one other public inquiry about a "Guide to Mediation".
[15:23] <alex756> I also did get a few emails directly that were confidential inquiries of people that did not want to publish their questions on the wiki.
[15:23] <alex756> I think the problem is ongoing communication between members.
[15:23] <Sam_Spade> thats why were here, eh?
[15:24] <Sam_Spade> its not like you guys call me alot
[15:24] <alex756> And as present Coordinator I will support anything within reason that helps that, because I can see that our organiation is valuable, even it does not seem to be very "busy".
[15:24] <Sam_Spade> not even messages on my talk page *sob*
[15:24] <alex756> Sam, that is what I am talking about, AMA members should be the ones trying to communicate with the Coordinator, not the other way around.
[15:24] <Sam_Spade> I agree
[15:24] <Sam_Spade> you should not be the SPAM guy
[15:25] <alex756> LOL.
[15:25] <Wally_AMA> It's not "spam".
[15:25] <Sam_Spade> but who has any place complaining?
[15:25] <Sam_Spade> what are we doing?
[15:25] <Sam_Spade> one guy resigned, because he was too busy
[15:25] <Sam_Spade> I think most are indifferent
[15:25] <alex756> Hey at least I'm not the guy who put the dual licensing notice on all the user talk pages, egh?
[15:25] <Sam_Spade> do you know how many wiki clubs I'm in?
[15:26] <Sam_Spade> yeah, I'm not complaining, alex
[15:26] <Sam_Spade> I like your notes
[15:26] <alex756> That is why we might have a commmittee Sam, it might at least get a few people involved more.
[15:26] <Sam_Spade> but I understand its boring sending them
[15:26] <Sam_Spade> I donno alex...
[15:26] <alex756> Actually I have it down to a science now, it doesn't take that long.
[15:26] <Sam_Spade> giving a position to people who arn't already busy....
[15:26] <Sam_Spade> idle hands do the devils work...
[15:27] <Sam_Spade> I don't trust commitees
[15:27] <alex756> What about people without experience learning from those who have more? Isn't that important?
[15:27] <Sam_Spade> if they have experiences
[15:27] <Sam_Spade> it may be
[15:27] <Wally_AMA> Sam, if you don't trust committees offer another workable solution.
[15:28] <alex756> So, someone like you, Sam, has an obligation to share your expertise with other AMA members, to help them become better advocates. Don't you agree?
[15:28] <Sam_Spade> but people w no real experience bossing about those who are busy advocating is what I envision when I hear "commitee"
[15:28] <Sam_Spade> I agree, alex
[15:28] <Sam_Spade> and you've heard my ideas, wally
[15:28] <Sam_Spade> I can repeat, if needed
[15:28] <Sam_Spade> I think we need incentive
[15:28] <alex756> That is why you would want there to be an election, Sam. The people who are running would have to make a statement about their qualifications to help run the AMA activities.
[15:28] <Sam_Spade> and leadership by the successful, and the rigorous
[15:29] <Sam_Spade> not the electable, or the most senior
[15:29] <alex756> What better way to recognize merit than an election?
[15:29] <Sam_Spade> every way
[15:29] <alex756> How would you make the choice of the most successful and most rigorous sam? I'd like to hear your suggestions.
[15:29] * Sam_Spadeaway has joined #AMA
[15:30] <Sam_Spadeaway> sorry, fell offline
[15:30] <Metasquares> Would you base your decision strictly on the number of people that an Advocate has helped?
[15:30] <Sam_Spadeaway> no
[15:30] <Wally_AMA> What base is there?
[15:30] <Metasquares> I think that an election is a good way to recognize merit, at least in the community's eyes
[15:30] <Wally_AMA> His criteria are completely subjective.
[15:30] <Sam_Spadeaway> there are many obvious methods of measurement
[15:31] <Sam_Spadeaway> I would accept any that was feasable
[15:31] <Metasquares> An election is subjective, but there aren't any objective ways to measure something like merit, which is inherently subjective
[15:31] <Sam_Spadeaway> bah
[15:31] <alex756> Please tell us your suggestions, not that they are obvious.
[15:31] <Sam_Spadeaway> ok
[15:31] <Sam_Spadeaway> number of cases
[15:31] <Sam_Spadeaway> number of successful cases
[15:31] <Sam_Spadeaway> numbner of happy customers
[15:31] <alex756> What if someone takes on a lot of cases and is not successful?
[15:31] <Sam_Spadeaway> those 3 are good
[15:31] <Sam_Spadeaway> all 3 are good
[15:31] <Sam_Spadeaway> especially in combination
[15:32] <Sam_Spadeaway> if 100% of comments from clients are bad...
[15:32] <alex756> What is success? If an advocate is advocating for someone who has an important point, then that case may not lead to a quick or easy resolution.
[15:32] <Sam_Spadeaway> thats pretty bad ;)
[15:32] <Sam_Spadeaway> often it doesn;t
[15:32] <Sam_Spadeaway> or he tries hard, and faiels
[15:32] <Sam_Spadeaway> thats why all 3 are good
[15:32] <alex756> No one has made any comments about any advocate to the AMA, so everyone is on equal footing as far as the Coordinator is concerned.
[15:32] <Sam_Spadeaway> :D
[15:33] * Anthere has quit IRC (Connection timed out)
[15:33] <alex756> What if the people who are most satisfied do not speak of their satisfaction?
[15:33] <Sam_Spadeaway> offer me incentove, and you'll have a stack of compliments about me, I'll see to that ;)
[15:33] <alex756> Anyway, I don't know what that has to do with sitting on a commmitee that organizes workshops or puts together written materials about advocacy.
[15:34] <Wally_AMA> To me, if a person doesn't speak of their advocacy, it is more likely successful.
[15:34] <alex756> They can also ask someone to help them who has a lot of experience.
[15:34] <Wally_AMA> People squawk when things go wrong, not right.
[15:34] <Sam_Spadeaway> This all sounds like a commitee!
[15:34] <alex756> I think you want us to give out some kind of "Metal" or "Badge" of honor.
[15:34] <Sam_Spadeaway> aieeeeeee! ;)
[15:35] <Sam_Spadeaway> I think we need to find out who knows what they are talking about
[15:35] <alex756> I have no problem with awarding an "advocate of the year" award, but that should not be confused with people who are willing to help out with organization.
[15:35] <Sam_Spadeaway> and then pay attention to them
[15:35] <Wally_AMA> I'm going to go AFK for a bit, all, and start working up my proposal for the reorganization.
[15:35] <Metasquares> Sam: Well what would you expect at a meeting if not a discussion between members about where the association is going?
[15:35] <alex756> The people on the commmittee are not going to be telling anyone what to do.
[15:35] <Wally_AMA> I'll be checking back in periodically; if we're going to schedule a time for voting on new proposals, please wait for me if possible.
[15:36] <alex756> They would be organizing a conference, and experienced advocates like you, sam can make a presentation.
[15:36] <Wally_AMA> If anybody has any other thoughts while I'm off, please PM me.
[15:36] <Sam_Spadeaway> that sounds great, alex
[15:36] <Sam_Spadeaway> but I expect something sinister
[15:36] * Wally_AMA is now known as Wally|AMAFK
[15:36] <Sam_Spadeaway> something that always seems to happen w commitees
[15:36] <alex756> I don't see how someone serving on a commmittee is going be telling anyone what to do. That is like Jimbo telling people what articles they could write on Wikipedia. That is never going to happen.
[15:36] <Sam_Spadeaway> entropy
[15:37] <Sam_Spadeaway> beurocracy
[15:37] <Wally|AMAFK> The committee, to my mind, would only give an order in an extreme circumstance.
[15:37] <Sam_Spadeaway> lack of impetus
[15:37] <Wally|AMAFK> I firmly hold to the belief of General George S. Patton - want people to get something done, tell them what to do and they'll surprise you with their ingenuity.
[15:37] <Sam_Spadeaway> and worst of all, some fathead commitee long out of the loop making a descision in an extreme case ;)
[15:37] <alex756> Well, then we can have an open membership committee, open meetings and then whomever comes to the meetings can be deputized by the Coordinator to help do something for the AMA.
[15:38] <Wally|AMAFK> We'd be here only to say what to do, not how to do it.
[15:38] <Wally|AMAFK> I disagree with that.
[15:38] <Sam_Spadeaway> oh....
[15:38] <Wally|AMAFK> We need a permanent, standing body for our group.
[15:38] <Metasquares> Maybe the committee should publish some sort of periodical report on what it's accomplished, to ensure that it stays current on matters
[15:38] <Wally|AMAFK> Not an ad hoc thing.
[15:38] <Wally|AMAFK> The committee will be exactly as Sam says if we have it open and meeting at god-knows-what times.
[15:39] <alex756> I think if we have a committee that always has a position open (rolling election) and meetings are open to all members that could be very responsive.
[15:40] <Sam_Spadeaway> mahoritocracy is bad
[15:40] <Sam_Spadeaway> especially when few vote
[15:40] <Sam_Spadeaway> which is our circumstance
[15:40] <alex756> But this is a membership organization, if the members don't particpate, why should they complain?
[15:41] <Sam_Spadeaway> what if they do both, like me?
[15:41] <Sam_Spadeaway> ;)
[15:41] <alex756> They have a chance to come to the meetings and to post comments on the talk pages, if they do not, what is the problem?
[15:41] <Sam_Spadeaway> I think every one of those names is a resource to us
[15:41] <Wally|AMAFK> I don't like the idea of rolling elections so that there's always an election coming up.
[15:41] <alex756> I am happy you are speaking up Sam, because I beleive that only through discussion can we get somewhere.
[15:41] <Sam_Spadeaway> potential advocates
[15:41] <Wally|AMAFK> As for open participation, no objections in principle.
[15:42] <Sam_Spadeaway> if we can motivate them, we can do something
[15:42] <alex756> I am just saying stagger the seats, if we have four, two can be for a year and the other two initially for six months.
[15:42] <alex756> And then every election afterwards is for two seats for one year.
[15:42] <alex756> That also gives some kind of continuity to the Committee.
[15:42] <Wally|AMAFK> Oh yes.
[15:42] <Wally|AMAFK> I agree completely.
[15:43] <Wally|AMAFK> Depending upon how many seats are available.
[15:43] <Metasquares> I agree with that as well
[15:43] <alex756> Or should we call it "the synarchy of the whole" to make Sam happy?
[15:44] <Sam_Spadeaway> heh...
[15:44] <alex756> How about "Synarchy of the Inner Temple" and we make senior advocates "Grand Priests". Sam, would you like to be a Grand Priest of the Synarchy of the AMA?
[15:45] <alex756> How is that for a "title of honour"?
[15:45] <Metasquares> :)

..continued on Wikipedia:AMA IRC Meeting log (1-30-05) Pt. III.