| Decide the fate of Retail-Worker (PLEASE READ THE THREAD BEFORE VOTING) | ||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
| Total Votes : 35 | ||||||||||||||
Joined: 19 Oct 2003
Posts: 2801
| Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:12 am Post subject: | |
Oh please do not trash the data base! I just loved providing the Alwin letters for the archive of "Famous letters in history" 
|
|
Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 653
| Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:42 am Post subject: | |
|
i just want to put my two cents worth in here. all of us on the macy's thread on this site are VERY VERY active. it is very unusual to not see a new comment made each and every day.
this site is very important to us as well. just speaking for myself, as long as it stays anonymous and "confidential" as it is now, i'm happy with the site. we all feel like we're truly are friends on this site, griping and bitching about the company we hate so much, but also getting really good info on what is really going on in our stores before it is announced IN our store. the only thing that the former retailworker site had that was better was you could "program" it so you could read the latest comment first, instead of scrolling thru each page which takes a lot of time. thanks for taking care of this site. i really do appreciate it. |
|
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Posts: 54
| Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:18 pm Post subject: | |
| you can jump to the last comment by clicking on the date above the submitters name (from the forum page, on the right) | |
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 1700
| Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2009 2:19 am Post subject: | |
|
....I ain't getting the warm fuzzy.
JMHO |
|
Joined: 04 Jul 2003
Posts: 933
Location: roaming...
| Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 2:37 am Post subject: | |
|
Hmm...
Hypothetical scenario: Bell Atlantic has just sent its broadband subscribing customers a letter. Said letter reads something to the effect, "Dear customers. We would like to offer you a choice of increasing your allowed monthly bandwidth from 60GB to 62GB, or, if you so wish, to keep it at the current 60GB. Please vote in the public poll at bellatlanticdotcom/generouspoll". The generous offer is to open bandwidth not to unlimited, not to double it to 120GB, not to increase it by 25%, but to raise it by a measly 2GB. Either that, or no change and you're stuck at sucksville. Not the fairest of polls, is it? The options listed in this thread spell out basically the same type of scenario. You are given the option to either a) lose the current board and start from scratch, or to b) lose everything altogether. In this light, option "a" is conveniently labelled "make it better" and option "b" is labelled "death". Sound much like "if you don't like your job, then feel free to quit"? You'd think that a Sears management type was laying down these options. Oh wait... LOL I really believe this could have been executed better, especially over the longer term leading up until now. Absolutely everyone I know and have ever known who has run a forum gets tired of the same old same old, eventually. Exponentially so, if they've been running it solo the entire time. This is precisely what should have been changed with the set up at r-w a long time ago when that idea was first proposed. The forums should have been populated with member moderators and member senior moderators and eventually even member admins. Forum staff absolutely *must* come from its its rank and file, from its active membership, for a forum to live on. That is the tried and true, winning formula in 100% of the successful forums out there. Speaking in present terms, it's not too late for the above formula to work its magic here. Get local membership involved in running the board. Let them moderate, delegate, tweak (the board, not themselves, lol). As for technical issues... so as not to burden yourself, why not appoint a couple of able admins? This usually takes a bit of time (to develop trust), hence why it would have been so much easier were this process started way back when. If the site resides on a server you'd rather not allow r-w admins access to, why not move it to a separate account altogether? Need funding for said separate account? Why not institute an annual fund drive? Every other site does it and lives on, so why would r-w be any different? This way, if the site dies, at least it will be due to "lack of funding" and not due to "meh, I kinda don't like this gig any more". The above formula is based on one main principle - TRUST. That is something which has kind of been absent here to the degree at which running a forum as a collective is concerned. Ironic, really, if you think about it. This site was rescued by another site which promotes collectives, yet the running of this site has been completely contrary to that very principle. One little step at a time, that's how forum collectives are built. First one member is trusted with moderator keys, then another, then one is promoted to a senior moderator, then to an admin and so the collective grows and the "owner" of the site is not burdened with the daily nuances of the subforums, members and software, to the point where they lose any desire to do anything about anything to do with the site any more. In this manner, also, when it comes time for one or more staff members or even "owner"s to move on, the process of replacing them becomes rather intuitive and seamless for all involved. It's not too late. Give the tried and true formula (of 'staffing' with members) a go. Alternatively, give someone else, trustworthy, a chance at giving the formula a go with the current set up. If the current "owner"s do not wish to carry on any further, period, then trusting the current database to someone who is willing to use the above formula is a much better proposition, IMHO, than following through with any option which in effect freezes or kills the current board. Even if the "freeze" option is presented as "make it better". Whatever shakes, it's been a slice! 
|
|