ADMIN: Mod Privileges

[Cindy C.]

Hi!

A while back, I asked about Yahoo's new limit on Mod privileges. 
Dicey confirmed that each group gets 15 mod/owner slots, and that if a
group is already over 15, then it doesn't get new slots for newcomers
until privileges are removed from enough people to make it to 15.

So far, so good.

I then asked:

> Maybe we can solve this problem by setting up one Yahoo Account that
> does have Mod privileges for this list.  All of the FAQ members who
> don't have their own Mod privileges could have the password and
>could sign in as a Mod whenever they need to do something, er . . .
>Mod-ish. This would require someone to surrender their own Mod
>privileges, though.


AND

>Has MEG found any kind of solution for this problem, or are you all
>still working on it? How did MEG manage to get that "HPfGU-elf"
>account, and can we do the same thing here?

To date, we haven't heard a clear answer from our MEG members, who may
well still be working on the problem.  There were no volunteers to
surrender their Mod powers on this list, unfortunately.

This new limit on the number of moderators does concern me, though. 
We are currently talking about bringing in some undetermined number of
enthusiastic new members, and it would be a good idea to allow them to
have Mod privileges, IMHO.  Any new members who aren't MEGs and also
haven't ever had Mod powers on some other Yahoo group would benefit
from having Mod privileges so they can learn the ropes more quickly. 
Further, if we brought in someone to replace Porphyria as she
requested, that new webmaster surely ought to have Mod privileges
here, which isn't possible unless we do something about this.

I'm going to just go ahead and assume that the "HPfGU Elf" account on
the main list is a community account where all the elves who don't
have their own Mod powers can sign on and do Mod-ish things, and I'll
further assume that this is working just dandy.  If so, and lacking
any better solution, perhaps we should do the same thing.  

Currently, the following 31 people have Mod privileges here:

Abigail
Ali
Albus The Wise 
Amanda
Charis
Cindy
Debbie
Derannimer
Dicey
Eric
Eileen
Elkins
Eloise
Gail
Heidi
Jo
Joy
Kimberly
Marina
Melanie Moore
Melody
Morgan
Paul
Penny
Pip
Pippin
Phyllis
Porphyria
Sheryll
Tabouli
Tom

The owner is still Melanie Moore, and there's no way that I know of to
transfer ownership to one of us.

Maybe the only thing that makes sense at this point is to create a
community FAQ Mod account (assuming this is possible) and then remove
privileges from enough of us to make that happen.  

Since we have no volunteers to surrender privileges, I would suggest
that we give privileges to those of us who either need them for tech
work we perform or have been reasonably active/productive on this list
(defined as posting here and working on an FP).
  
We have a number of people who have diligently performed coding work
or link check work in the past or written fabulous FPs, but since we
have no FAQs ready for coding or link checking, perhaps we can't
afford to give Mod privileges to our coders and link checkers and past
FAQ writers.  I also removed from the list those working in the house
system, leaving Mod privileges in the hands of the prefects of each house.

To get us down to 14 Mods, I'd propose that the following people
retain their privileges:

Abigail
Ali
Cindy
Debbie
Derannimer
Dicey
Eileen
Heidi
Melanie Moore
Melody
Morgan
Paul
Porphyria
Tom

Everyone else (including newcomers) could use the community account.

While I'm on the subject of membership, I think we should seriously
consider revising our policy on lurking.  We have some great folks
here who lurk (around 20), in some cases for a year or more.  This is
not problematic in and of itself.  

But we also have a list of members on the FP home page.  Our FP Owls
list says, "These are the HPfGU members who have worked long and hard
to compile great posts and edit them all into the pages you see here."

It really doesn't seem fair to credit members who drifted away ages
ago as contributing when they really aren't (individual FP authors are
credited in their FPs).  It also makes our group look a whole lot
bigger than it really is.  I mean, if any listmembers are wondering
why a working group of 42 members hasn't produced any new FPs or
significant revisions at all since November 2002, the answer might be
that we aren't anything close to a working group of 42 members.

BTW, the team list needs to be revised to reflect recent departures
and arrivals.  Volunteers?

So.  What do you think?  MEG, would this work, based on your
experience?  Does anyone have any alternative solutions?

Cindy