The Internet and the Cactus Hobby

[Roy]

Derek this came from another thread. This is one part of a scheme put forward by Chris 43


"3. If we do reach a consensus view, or even a majority view on a specific suggestion, those who are against should shut up, and accept."


If I gave the impression that I did not want experts that is not so. I was pointing out that some experts might think it intimidating to come onto a public forum and have questions fired at them by people, some of whom could be hostile to their point of view.
Reading it again I see that my "some" could have been interpreted to mean the usual forum members.

[Chris43]

Derek,

Roy has quoted a message from a previous post.

The whole message was concerned with an offer from Bill to be the compiler of a list of"wants" for developments on the Forum.

The message in its completeness said:

OK, Bill, do go for it and try to assemble a wants list - but I'd caution for a few reasons:

1. Justification - to emphasise that each "want" should also have a justification. Something like "sponsor the P&P of the seed/seedling exchange" onit sown isn't enough - why do so is also needed. Then people can take a position, else everyone will see a different aspect of why, and then a consensus view is probably rather difficult.

2. Everyone has an equal view - the more vocal shouldn't see their suggestions adopted just because they go on about it multiple times.

3. If we do reach a consensus view, or even a majority view on a specific suggestion, those who are against should shut up, and accept.

4. Decide whether its a Forum development or a full BCSS website, including the Forum, that you are targetting.

5. Do involve the designated BCSS IT Manager, Tony Mace, in this, as I'm sure he also has ideas for development, and would welcome some greater support, and this would certainly increase the chances of the wider Committee responding positively to porposals for change.


As you can see, the context was one of positive development, rather than the portrayal of someone who wants to ride roughshod over the view sof the Forum members.

How this becomnes "no one should oppose the opinion of a small number of BCSS members who have a common opinion". I fail to see.

By definition, consensus implies general agreement from everybody. Majority implies not a small number but a greater proportion of the members".

[Roy]

Well what exactly do you think "shut up and accept means"

[fritz]

j agree, bcss moderator, the gb forum is very activ. plus punkt is add the pics.

just we start in january 2007 the intntl.forum for friends off hardy/frosthardy exotics.(not commercial).

http://fhnavajo.communityhost.de

merci fritz

[bcss]

The point about paying for google adverts is that these appear on other relevant sites in addition to the Google search engine pages. The BCSS already pays for google adverts and it adds around 500/visitors per month to the website.
You can make up alternative adverts which will be selected in order of effectiveness. I can add one direct to the Forum and see how that goes. That won't add any additional cost.

[CactusChris]

Hi Roy,
It means that we abandon the small amount of democracy that we have here and only the policy makers will have their views aired. Sorry guys, democracy means that althogh the rules may be decided by majority vote it is everyone right to campaign for the changes they believe in, and they should be allowed to voice them.

Best regards

Chris

Roy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well what exactly do you think "shut up and accept
> means"

[Bill]

I am getting a bit confused here, I thought Roy said everyone should accept the consensus or majority decision, that in my book is democracy.

[CactusChris]

Hi Bill,
Accepting the majority decision is democracy - 'shutting up' and so accepting that it is unchangable is not.
Say we agreed by majority not to discuss Lithops, ok so no posts about lithops and i accept that we should not post about lithops, but if i think it is wrong then i have to try to change the majority - not by posting about lithops but about the restrictions and their reasons as to why we cannot post ablut lithops - clear as mud eh.


Chris

[Chris43]

My very last word on the subject - I think that these last few posts have just proved my point.

[Bill]

To be quite honest CactusChris I don't think Roy meant it that way, whinging about a decision is different from re-opening a debate at a later stage if circumstances dictate.