Wild Wild West - Part 2

[WebSlave]

Kinda sad Rich. Now you're selling the ability to do the job that mods, the people YOU won't appoint, should be doing.

Who was it who did that before.......ahhhh yes, most of the disposed royalty the world over. They sold the ability to rule to the few who not only wanted it but had the wherewithall to do so.

It really is a BIG step down.

No offence to anyone who actually has the membership level to give out points, unless I'm already on record as not a friend of yours, but this is sort of like saying, "I'd like 90% of you who are most qualified to achieve the goals I've set out to not participate in this program because you haven't given me enough money to warrant your consideration for this program which you would no doubt be good at as well as for."

You've done some intersting things in the past but this may well be the topper.

So far.

Wes, the ONLY thing I can remember you liking about ANYTHING I have ever done here is when I made those garish color changes to the site.........

 

[Chameleon Company]

Rich writes:
Yep, exactly. Take it or leave it. Use it (pay $100-250) or not. Really, it doesn't matter to me. I'm just putting some tools in place for those who think they can handle the responsibility and authority and REALLY WANT (Paid $100-250)to do so. If the "price" (in more ways than one) (no, its only one way ...$100 minimum) is too high for you, then so be it. But after noon time on Sunday, when someone complains about this being the "Wild Wild West", I can ask what YOU have done PERSONALLY to try to make it better (the only option is to pay $100-250, BTW).
Not worth it to you to help? Fine. I understand. No, really, I do........

If no one uses the warning points (pays me $100), then I will just have to assume everyone is happy with the site and what the members here are doing. Not a problem.....

I took the liberty to add the text in bold above. Have we now established that the measure for thinking things matter here is to pony up $100 ? If you don't pay out $100, then you are assumed to be happy. (smile of someone who posts here for less than $100).

To all who voiced opinions in the many posts of the two Wild Wild West threads, your participation is noted. But frankly, without $100, you didn't really care, did you.

 

[crotalusadamanteus]

To all who voiced opinions in the many posts of the two Wild Wild West threads, your participation is noted. But frankly, without $100, you didn't really care, did you.

Intended or not, it does sorta appear like that don't it?

 

[Griz]

To all who voiced opinions in the many posts of the two Wild Wild West threads, your participation is noted. But frankly, without $100, you didn't really care, did you.

The more interesting thing to note is where would this site be if it weren't for those same posters? Somehow, I think Fauna would be the one on the losing end of that scenario. But, if those are the goals.....

Griz

 

[Wilomn]

Wes, the ONLY thing I can remember you liking about ANYTHING I have ever done here is when I made those garish color changes to the site.........

Then your memory is selective.

Wait, I already said that. Several times.

 

[Mike Greathouse]

So how did what you did in the past change with this new program, Mike? You never were enabled to enforce the rules here, were you? So what does that "$100 price tag" change for YOU? That "$100 price tag" ONLY enables members to be able to utilize the warning points system to help enforce the rules here, which you NEVER had access to before. You seem to be implying that now there is a fundamental change in your "willingness to help" in ANY fashion because of something that was NOT taken away from you at all. You haven't LOST anything, you just haven't GAINED anything.

If you don't need to or want to enforce the rules, then no problem, that is your choice to make. If you yourself do not run afoul of the rules, then does it really make a difference if a $100 paid member assesses them against you or I or the moderators do?

So what EXACTLY are you upset over about this?

No, you're correct. I have never had that power. However, the whole point of this program was to empower the membership and let them see what it's like to walk in your shoes. I just drew the conclusion, as many others did, that membership, meant membership and not a select few. As I stated previously, I am not interested in this power. I just feel that something that was proposed as a method for the membership to self-regulate, should be just that.

Then when you throw out a statement like this:

I can ask what YOU have done PERSONALLY to try to make it better

I feel compelled to respond. Many people have gone to great lengths to ensure the longevity of this site. Many hours and many dollars have been spent in this endeavor. Then, all of a sudden, you decide that you're just not interested in playing any more!

I'm sorry, from the time that you first accepted money, you were now selling a product. Just because you decided it was no longer worthy of your time, doesn't mean that everyone who paid for the product, is no longer entitled to it.

Many have offered to help with the load here, but you continually turn them away and opt to go with the benevolent benefactor status.

For me, that just isn't an acceptable response.

You may, or may not recall, I was the first person to pony up for the endowment membership here. This was right on the heels of the "Fauna Fund" which I initially suggested, and was the first to offer an item for auction. I feel that I have gone above and beyond in trying to support this site.

I did not renew at the Endowment level because in that year, all of the rules changed and we were already beginning the autopilot version of Fauna.

As I have stated many times, I would like to see Fauna return to an actively run site. I still feel that it is the best site of it's kind, but decisions like the one being made here, make it more and more difficult to maintain those beliefs.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

Geeze, folks! It's really very simple.

MONEY = POWER

Everybody knows that!

 

[WebSlave]

I took the liberty to add the text in bold above. Have we now established that the measure for thinking things matter here is to pony up $100 ? If you don't pay out $100, then you are assumed to be happy. (smile of someone who posts here for less than $100).

To all who voiced opinions in the many posts of the two Wild Wild West threads, your participation is noted. But frankly, without $100, you didn't really care, did you.

If you are asking about whether or not I care that someone pays the $100 and uses the Warning System, no, I really don't care at all. That is the criteria I have chosen for participation and ANYONE here can either use it or not. It wouldn't be the first time I put something on this site that went mostly unused, and certainly won't be the last. Heck, most people won't even KNOW about it for years, I think. How many members using the forum based classifieds even know about the classifieds control panel in place?

As for strictly enforcing the rules to try to make this a better site, been there and done that, and got nothing but headaches because of it. So I'm putting tools in place for YOU to do that sort of work if you are so inclined. I am using the paid membership as a method to determine YOUR resolve to actually and truly want to make that sort of effort. If you're not willing, thinking the cost is too great, well, neither am I, who has been asked to do this FOR FREE. I've already tried to do that. What about you? Think you can do any better an enforcing the rules here? Be fair, even handed, all seeing, impartial, unbiased, and never miss even ONE other person violating a rule that you dinged someone else for? Well here's your chance to try those shoes on for size.

Yes, I am requiring that you be within a narrowly selected criteria before you are allowed to do so, and you can take offense at that if you want, but that's just the way it is. Of all the possible ways for me to make a selection, THIS is the way I am choosing to do it.

And if you don't like it, well no, I really don't care. Because I was CERTAIN a percentage of members here were not going to like it, no matter what it was I did, even if I did nothing at all. So at HIGH NOON on Sunday, this IS being implemented regardless of who doesn't like it, nor who uses it or not.

Matter of fact, I may even then assign (or "draft" if you prefer) ALL Benefactor and Endowment level members to being forum moderators and turn back on the "Report a Post" function, so THEY will get the notifications of infractions within "their" forums that members feel they need to report. So as "someone" has suggested, I am going to delegate this sort of thing as much as possible. And as such abdicating my responsibility for that function by turning it over to those individuals who demonstrate that they WANT it.

So really and truly, NO, I don't care. Not to the extent that I am going to put the monkey back onto my back here. If you all want this site to be better, than YOU have to MAKE it better, not me trying to force it to be so.

Oh yeah, did I say "I don't care"? I can't remember........

 

[WebSlave]

OK, I guess some people came to the mistaken impression that I was seeking feedback for the implementation of this new project. And I was willing to allow it to go in that direction and answer questions. But I believe all the cards are out on the table now, and that is that. This subject is now closed.