No.13027
>>13022>filter "socially conservative"This is a terrible idea.
Social conservative =/= rightist and filtering it invites liberalism to infest the site. Moreover filtering it means that any discussion on the topic is going to be handicapped. Being socialist doesn't mean being a liberal about every single thing, that's undialectical and goes against Marxist and general socialist theory; change for the sake of change serves reactionaries and rightoids, not leftism.
No.13029
>>13027Nobody even proposed it last week, chill.
No.13030
In accordance with some of the suggestions which are extensively covered here >>>/leftypol/503609 I have several proposals.
No.13031
Proposal 1 - Recruitment of 1-5 new mods to replace some of the old ones (esp. those who may want to retire)
Proposal 2 - Discuss recruitment of non mod staff to handle social media outreach and growth strategies.
Proposal 3 - Reorganization of modocracy to groups based on siloed focus (ex: tech/mods/outreach)
Proposal 4 - Elect an executive. Instead of voting on every issue, simply elect an executive, either a single individual or small group (individual is better), who is recallable by vote. The executive makes all decisions except electing themselves and kicking or adding any member from/to the modocracy. This will free up the modocracy to get back to the core tasks of tech, modding, outreach/growth, and other activities associated with maintaining and growing leftypol.
No.13032
>>13031Seconding the idea of recruiting new staff. (in Proposal 1)
No.13033
>>13031>Elect an executive>recallable by voteWhat about selecting by sortition instead? If they can be recalled by vote later why not just start them randomly selected?
No.13034
>>13033thats also a good idea.
Proposal 4b - same as proposal 4 except by sortition.
No.13035
>>13029Are you ill? See
>>12173 and read the proposals
No.13042
>filter socially conservative to actually reactionary
>one executive at the head of mod incorporated
You have got to be fucking kidding me. Scratch a lib and a fascist bleeds lmao
No.13051
For the few who still don't get it: This thread is not here to talk about yourself or your fbi.gov friends.
No.13053
>>13031seconding Proposal 1
No.13056
>>13031Agree to the first proposal of recruiting new mods, but I don't think they should replace the old mods. Plus we should only start the recruitment process only once a new mod recruitment process is in place.
Not sure what to think of the second proposal, going to abstain for now.
Disagree with the rest of the proposals. I think we should maintain the non-hierarchal structure of the mod team.
No.13057
>>13031>Elect an Executive I think all of us should understand the reason this is a bad idea. recallable by vote or not, they are the EXECUTIVE.
No.13060
>>13031I'm gonna repost what I said in that topic about such ideas.
>>Essentially the modocracy that exists right now is a “simple” structure”, with a flat hierarchy, in fact it’s even simpler than the simple structure because even that has a nominal leader. This is a suboptimal way to organize things from both an efficiency or efficacy perspective:
>>The simple configuration is flexible but not usually efficient or effective. The efficiencies of specialization are not realized, as the employees are asked to do many tasks for which they may not be fully skilled. The simple configuration depends heavily upon the vision of [it’s leadership] for its effectiveness orientation. A danger is that the focus can be narrow and not very effective … if needs change and vary over time. Because [it’s leadership] [are] the focal point of all information processing in the firm, it can be difficult for [it’s leadership] to take time to adjust the [organization’s] direction or seek innovative opportunities. In brief, the simple configuration does not take advantage of the efficiencies of specialization.
>>Therefore a more complex management structure is needed."
<I am shocked - SHOCKED, that some psued book about 'how to create more efficient organisations' is pretty much just the existing corporate structure jerking itself off. Of course the people writing this book think that a strong dictatorial executive, or highly stratified subgroups, is the 'most efficient and effective form of management', because that's what the corporate structure aspires to. It's circular logic, can't you see that?
<I'm not saying nothing about leftypol can be improved but this rant gives off about 5000 peta-ideologies.
>anon this is based on empirical studies of organizations it may be capitalistic but that doesn't mean its wrong, just like adam smith and ricardo informed Marx. You're acting like its just people making it up. its sourced
<Economics is basically religion.
<Of course organisations that are actually effective, visionary, etc are going to have better results, but the organisations that claim to be the most dynamic and forward thinking and whatever are actually some of the shittiest most dysfunctional ones.
<And furthermore - even if we do accept that these 'rules' are correct, these are rules for creating effective, efficient corporate exploitation machines whose only goal is profit maximisation. That is not a template we should want to emulate.And this is not me but I agree with it:
>This. I saw the quotes with typical corporate management drivel and wondered why OP would want to draw from it, then skipped to the TL;DR. My jaw hit the floor when I saw the suggestion to "vote on one guy to be dictator". Not only does this call back to Watermelon's post announcing his attempted coup, opposition to a single person executive is a foundational principle of Marxist and anarchist thought - in government, in productive firms, and especially in our own organizations. Marx even coined a derisory term for the practice: "labour monarchism", describing Lasalle's party.Anyway, to sum up, I'm not opposed to having new moderators on the team but I also think the climate is so turbulent right now that recruiting them could be difficult.
As for the other suggestions, I pretty much do oppose them, I'm not opposed to us having specific tasks to get completed like Krates and Antinous have been suggesting, but reorganising us into 'ministries' seems like a step too far, especially when there's hardly that many of us.
I know we haven't been very good at social media and so on so I guess letting other people help out with it wouldn't be the worst idea, but this would require some kind of stratified system which I think is risky to our existing structure. Besides, where would we find the people willing to do this? However, I guess proposal 2 isn't so bad overall, but it needs more time to cook.
As for proposal 4, this is a terrible idea which I oppose completely. The troubles we have had lately have been caused by too much power concentrating in the hands of one person, not having too little authority. We shouldn't throw away everything we've built just to become another autocracy. The parallels to Space, Dollars, Watermelon, and yes, Che, are obvious.
No.13065
>>13060With regards to clarification on proposal 2, I suggest the growth team could implement some of the strategies here:
>>13059 and detailed in the corresponding book review/idea thread on leftypol.
In any case I'd appreciate mods and anons to give feedback in the /GEG/ thread as well.
No.13066
>>13031>Proposal 1 - Recruitment of 1-5 new mods to replace some of the old ones (esp. those who may want to retire)Yes, however we are not quite ready yet. I have been tasked during the last meeting to think about this question and I will give my thoughts about it during the next one.
>Proposal 2 - Discuss recruitment of non mod staff to handle social media outreach and growth strategies.Why not.
>Proposal 3 - Reorganization of modocracy to groups based on siloed focus (ex: tech/mods/outreach)I don't think this is warranted given the size of the mod team (and even if we were to recruit 5 more mods). In fact, that would right now add a layer of administrative complexity that would only over-complicate things with no obvious added benefit. However there is no harm in thinking about it.
>Proposal 4 - Elect an executive. Instead of voting on every issue, simply elect an executive, either a single individual or small group (individual is better), who is recallable by vote. The executive makes all decisions except electing themselves and kicking or adding any member from/to the modocracy. This will free up the modocracy to get back to the core tasks of tech, modding, outreach/growth, and other activities associated with maintaining and growing leftypol.Atrocious idea, don't really have the time right now to elaborate, I hope some anons and fellow mods will explain why it's rather bad. For me, this is a case of a bad solution to a problem that is not here.
No.13071
>>13022I have an idea or Proposal the mods could look at
>Moderator votes remain the counted votes in admin decisions, but users should let vote using strawpolls per topic to display general user attitude to a proposal. If majority User opinion directly opposes moderator majority vote then the proposals should be discussed and votes called on again after a break of 1-2 weeks to let people rethink positions on a topic. <obvious /pol/ trolling and spam should be taken into account in these user pollsThis would allow for a more democratic and user friendly voting process, but doesn't just let the sites administrative decisions become a free-for-all mess like on (.net)
No.13072
>>13071ok but whats to stop pol from brigading? and how would you account for that in the polls? How do we define a true leftypol user??
No.13074
>>13072>whats to stop pol from brigading1) They rarely raid or come here
2) that's the reason I said that a majority user vote only stalemates an opposing moderator vote, so even if /pol/ spams, they'll just delay the vote for a couple weeks, raids only last a short time so a balanced recount can be made.
No.13078
>>13074they can do gayops without raiding explicitly.
No.13079
>>13022vote against all proposals
No.13084
>>13078True, but that is the reason it's a proposal, the mods can think of safeguards and shit in Matrix discussion - they did ask for ideas.
No.13094
>>13031Vote no to 1 for the time being. I think we need to come up with better ways to filter out potentially problematic people from the staff and introduce new additional security measures for new staff.
Vote no to 2. As Redlid pointed out people already do leftypol stuff without being a part of the leftypol staff or being sanctioned by them.
Vote no to 3. I don't think we need to assign people roles and stuff, these are not salaried positions, people can just help out however they can
primitive communism style.Vote no to rule 4. I think any kind of formal hierarchy in the staff is a bad idea and 2 heads are better than one.
No.13095
>>13060I agree totally with what Caballo has said here
>>13094my tag messed up
No.13096
>>13095>>13094ahhhhhhhhhhhhh
No.13103
Embedding error.
>>13031>Recruitment of 1-5 new mods to replace some of the old ones I'm not sure of the number of mods that are currently active, but I support this, and there should probably be 10-15 mods on this site at a time.
>recruitment of non mod staff to handle social media outreach and growth strategies.Not a mod but this is a great idea, PPH is rising slowly but the lack of social media exposure (and the fact that google puts chan(dot)net as its first search result for "leftypol") is annoying. To filter out redditors I think that filters like those proposed by
>>13097 are a good idea
<filtering all the reddit social exclusion words, like "tankie" and "red fascist" to "beloved comrade" <We could filter "class reductionist" to "class conscious" that'd probably ward off the red neolibs from reddit. Also someone needs to make an official /leftypol/ Youtube channel and repost all the meme videos, documentary videos and other content from the webm thread there. Stuff like Embed* related is not enough to get our popularity on its own
>Reorganization of modocracy to groups based on siloed focus (ex: tech/mods/outreach) This is a good idea for the future but requires a larger mod group, minimum of 15 people so that each board has an even distribution of fair moderation.
>Elect an executive Already said it's a bad idea, so I'm not going to repeat tht.
*Speaking of the Embed, I find it funny that youtube censored it to be 18+, Kek.
No.13114
>>13053based
i support Proposal 1
No.13128
I propose /leftypol/ officially recognizes that Lenin was a mushroom, as it is well established fact.
No.13144
Hello, I just noticed that the "autism score" filter for eye queue would be more detrimental to discussions on /edu/ than on other boards by far. Is there any way to make an exception for that board?
No.13150
>>13031Aye on prop 1
nah on the rest
No.13153
>>13144We have now removed this wordfilter from /edu/.
No.13175
Not sure if this is the adequate place to ask, but could we have a worldfilter list? Getting hard to keep track of all these changes
No.13193
>>13175Now that we have more than a couple, I think it's fine to have it publicly on the FAQ page. I'm happy to propose it formally.
No.13202
>>13193That would be very helpful. Thanks.
No.13272
>>130311-Yes
2-Yes
3-Yes
4-No. Only if things get too fractional.
No.13273
>>13272Wait I change 3 to No.
No.13282
>>13022Proposal 1 - Recruitment of 1-5 new mods to replace some of the old ones (esp. those who may want to retire)
For: Barbara_Pitt, Discomrade, Pask, Redlidmilk, Wvobbly, Comet
PROPOSAL PASSED
Proposal 2 - Discuss recruitment of non mod staff to handle social media outreach and growth strategies.
For: Barbara_Pitt, Krates, Comet
PROPOSAL PASSED
No.13292
Please stop with the retarded wordfilters this isn't funny, stop forcing your shitty memes
No.13296
>>13292counterpoint: I find them funny myself, make even more why not
proposal: filter wordfilter to platonic ideal
No.13298
>>13292but I like wordfilters when they're either harmless or make malicious posters less annoying
Unique IPs: 22