Thoughts on UKG (and other mass mail lists too)

[davywavy]

Posted as an answer to one of Steve Claptons posts, but repeated here.

I think UKG has become of decreasing use and worth to the society as we have grown. It is handy as an annoucement board for games and society business, but I'd say that the quality of general debate has declined as the cam has grown, to the extent where it is now of very little worth to read long threads. Too many cooks spoiling the broth and all that. I'd say it's incorrect to use it as a gauge as to the feelings of the membership, as not only are most of the membership not on it, but most of the membership (even the ones who are on it) *don't care*.
Very often, it is the same people - perhaps a dozen or so - venting at one another and trying to score points. Perhaps the greatest use of UKG is to judging the mood of the society is that it gives a fairly accurate impression of what the 10% at the extreme end of any argument are thinking, and that most people are somewhere in between, clustering round the 'couldn't give a toss' pole somewhere in the middle.
To find out what people are thinking, I've always gone with Napoleon: "If you want an argument, get a group. If you want to know what people think, ask them as individuals." He was right.

Comments

Hmph

[thoabath.livejournal.com]

However, what UK General does is allows those dozen or so people to vent.

Then they can get shrinks, just like everyone else. :)

"Getting yelled at" isn't in our job descriptions.

And if someone has a concern, they can take it through channels. After all, that's why they're there.

Re: Hmph

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

Once again, I disagree.

Like I said elsewhere, my phone number, as NC, was freely available to all members.
An officer who is not easily available to any member to whom they are responsible is not doing their officerial job properly. Far too often the channels are a handy thing to hide behind for officers who don't want that degree oof access.

I tried to set a precedent that officers should be available. Sadly, few seem to have taken the hint.

Re: Hmph

[thoabath.livejournal.com]

Might be a matter of scale... I don't want nearly five thousand members having the ability to call me at a moment's notice. :) Also, a matter of job description... NC and ANST handle two very different set of job duties. But I'm on several dozen email lists, I've created a second LiveJournal, usanstmage, solely for Camarilla duties, I participate on the WW Forums, I've had business cards with email and URL printed for distribution at Regional and Nationals, and I've been more than happy to give my Coordinator and ST superior contact information on request.

I am available. For discussion. Not for being ranted at.

Re: Hmph

[omentide.livejournal.com]

Not shrinks. A bit of decent assertiveness training would be more helpful.

I do believe a public channel for debate is useful. I also believe it's more useful if representatives of what is seen as 'the power cabal' make themselves available. A bit like Prime Minister's Question Time (only, as it's under the CoC, more polite). Talking to someone on the phone is a one to one thing. Sometimes the venting on lists only happens when that's failed. Sometimes it happens when it's not so much a 'problem one person has' as a factor people feel should be subject to public debate.

No, the standard of public debate is not high. Do our schools still teach kids how to debate?

The way decisions are taken and announced within the Cam feels very authoritarian. I'm not saying it IS that way. I tend to believe this comes about because many not all, please do NOT read all) of those making the announcements lack the self-confidence and people skills to get the concepts across.

Then, when someone takes objection to the announcement, the person announcing (due to lack of self-confidence, assertiveness skills, whatever) takes it horribly personally. Which may or may not have been intended.

Possibly this is a property of mailing lists, rather than anything specific to the Cam. Still, I am not at all sure what purpose it serves when prominent figures withdraw from a public forum.

Re: Hmph

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

I'd agree with you wholeheartedly on that.

For the most part, people who have the time to put into the Cam as full-time officers, tend to be people who don't have full-time, responsible jobs. That means either students or people who can't get jobs like that - and usually that means they'll lack the skills.