ADMIN/MEMB: Prospective Members (reformatted)

[Cindy C.]

Aw, crap.  I just *cannot* get the hang of posting from e-mail.  I'll
clean this up and delete the original . . . 

**************

Thanks for keeping the ball rolling on this, Tom.
  
> Tom:
>  
> Several of them have been left hanging for a while now, and so I'm 
> sending this out as a "Special Notice." This way, we can all take a 
> look at the list and give it some thought.

 
  
FWIW, sending this as a special notice means that it won't reach those
who have chosen "No e-mail" as their FAQ list delivery option (I
think).  You'll need to either switch those FAQ members to "Special
Notices" or you'll have to send this to them as an off-list.  FWIW,
when I ran the group, I tried to keep everyone on "Special Notices"
and use those notices very rarely, but I don't know how we want to
handle that now.  I don't know if any of us currently has the
authority to change anyone else's delivery options without permission.
 
>  - boyd.t.smythe (boyd_smythe) goes by the name "Remnant." Requested 
> membership previously and was turned down.


I have been trying to figure out what happened here, fully expecting
to see my fingerprints all over this one.  I have no recollection of
dealing with his membership request, and I couldn't find anything by
searching "Moderator Activity."  Is he a member of the main list? 
How's his posting record, MEG/FAQ members?  Any howlers or other 
problems we should know about?  Is he moderated?  What was the date
his request was  rejected (there were periods this year when I wasn't
a member of FAQ)?

> Now, I don't know exactly how things have been done before (history 
> lessons are welcome); I was sent an invite to join, although I never 
> personally applied. 

One history lesson coming up!
 
Tom was invited out of the clear blue because of his smoldering,
bedroom eyes and aptitude for -- 

Oh, not *that* kind of history lesson?  ;-)
  
OK.  In the past (as of Oct. 2002, at least), FAQ membership was by
invitation only.  A member (usually me) would post a message on the
FAQ list proposing potential new members.  There would usually be a
deafening silence, which I construed as an enthusiastic consensus
"Yes!" On one famous occasion, there was a vehement off-list objection
to a candidate from someone whose opinion around here is entitled to
some weight because of the work the person did/role they played, and
that single off-list objection was enough for me to scratch the
candidate from the list.

  
Now, I think I proposed Grey Wolf in this latest round of new FAQers
(Tom/Derannimer/Abigail et al.).  Either that, or I considered
proposing him and then thought better of it; I can't recall.  Either
way, the issue was that Grey Wolf has had some problems with being
difficult on-list, and the concerns were such that he did not receive
an elf invitation from MEG at the time.  He has since joined MEG, I
understand.
  
>I suggest that we get to the people who have applied first: 
>boyd_smythe (Remnant) applied and was turned down, but I don't know 
>why the group came to that decision at the time. Can anyone explain 
>this? Should we see if he's still interested and/or reconsider him?

Unless we can sort out the reason why Remnant was turned down, we
should at least evaluate him and see if he might be a good addition to
the team, IMHO.  

> Carolyn White and Kelley have sent applications in recently, and 
> Michelle's been pending for a while. So we should get to all of them 
> first. 

I may be wrong, but I think the applications of the others (Steve, et
al.) have been pending for longer.  The interest of these three
(Kelley, et al.) dates no earlier than August, IIRC.  Did Michelle
ever send any sort of off-list to any of the FAQ list members
expressing interest in our group?  It would be appropriate to have a
look at Michelle's note.

> How does this work? Do we need a majority vote, or just a 
> simple consensus, i.e. if there are no strenuous objections, should 
> we just tacitly accept the person?


I think that if there are no objections, we should accept the person.
That is how we have done it in the past; we didn't hold elections.
Also, if we decide to have elections, then we may well descend into
the Administrative Hell of sorting out quorums, writing poll
questions, keeping polls open long enough, and so forth.
  
I think we should go with consensus because, well . . . people in this
group fulfill different roles.  Our members range from lurkers up to
members who are something next to indispensable.  If someone who does
a lot of work or fulfills a special function has a strong objection to
a candidate, I always had the view that this objection was entitled to
greater weight.  To the extent the FAQ list never suffered from
in-fighting and other conflict in the past, I suspect that approach
may be one of the reasons.  So I think we should accept any candidate
unless a current member objects.  FWIW, though, if a former member
wished to return (Simon, Jen, et al.), then I'd think we'd just allow
them to return without a lot of hoo-ha, especially in light of the
turmoil that led to some of these departures.  JMHO, of course.
  
> Whatever the case, I think the least pressing item on the agenda are 
> the people who have simply been nominated internally, like Grey
>Wolf, Juan Rodriguez, Bboy_mn, and the two anonymous candidates. 

 
I think the fairest way to proceed is to handle the entire group of
candidates at once.  After all, we're trying to wrap this in a week,
so the delay for the others won't be too much.  I'd like to see a
situation where we avoid giving some candidates the "inside track" by
virtue of their relationship with existing members of the group.

> Oh, and if we're missing anyone, now's probably a good time to throw 
> in a nominee or two.


Mmmm, I think quite a lot of:
  
Tyler Hewitt
Annemehr
RSFJenny (**especially** since she volunteered to elf but was not
selected)
Anyone else who volunteered on OTC to elf but was not selected; wasn't
there one other person?
Jen Reese
Terry James
Ellejir (Elle)
If we need a tech specialist, perhaps Psczmeska (sp)
Vulgarweed
  
  
How many people do we want, anyway?

Cindy