Street Fighter Ireland Committee and Function

Sisko

Well if you think this is me being egotistical thats fair enough all I can say is its not, I could get all patronising and **** and talk about 'you don't understand' or ;your not as tapped into whats going on' etc but screw it like your entitled to say what you want and the more discussion the better.


Even if its ripping into me I'd rather it on here.

Orim

Sisko wrote: »

@ Azza , its not simply 'who we want' its how many and so forth , and whether or not we want one , what its role is etc etc I think all needed to be voted on.


Just so everyones had a chance to be part of the making of this committee or community representatives. I think the idea of community reps works a little better then a 'committee' but anyway yeah.




Again, the lack of a committee had nothing to do with what happened this weekend, if this was an inferno that failed then yeah. Bumping the importance, imo should have entailed polls with a deadline of the end of the week rather then 'here's the committee'.

The committee would have prevented the SFIE from being associated with a tournament that we had so little knowledge about. As it was it managed to slip through the cracks and put a major tarnish on our community. The community goes beyond Inferno and the forums now.

We have the website and other extensions. These are resources that we need to ensure are used properly.

The bolded bits : People had a month and half to discuss these issues. Why would an extra week make a difference?

Sisko

Cause a deadline giving everyone a quick chance to have their say then going with the outcome no matter what when that deadline is reached is a smoother and fairer way to do this then just saying BAM here you go, this is the committee, deal.

I'm mean do you really disagree with me on that? Seems like the kind of thing I thought everyone would think. Seems a reasonable thing to think. Maybe not.


I don't mean to be a head wrecker guys , I've probably damaged peoples opinions of me now by not just keeping stuff to myself and letting this roll a head with out expressing my opinion. But I had to say it.

Just didn't seem like what people were talking about on the original thread.

Anyway I'm off to bed.

Jazzy

Sisko wrote: »

Well if you think this is me being egotistical thats fair enough all I can say is its not, I could get all patronising and **** and talk about 'you don't understand' or ;your not as tapped into whats going on' etc but screw it like your entitled to say what you want and the more discussion the better.


Even if its ripping into me I'd rather it on here.

it isnt. but from years of experience in lans and irish gaming in general, i know that ego's are the #1 cause of things turning to crap. thats why i said that, wasnt anything personal at all. shouldnt be so highly strung about it tbh

Orim

I agree with you that suddenly springing this idea on everyone would be a terrible. Where we disagree is that I don't feel the idea has been suddenly sprung on everyone.

Sisko, I appreciate that your putting your opinion out there. Better that then letting it go ahead without voicing your concerns and than feeling aggrieved/annoyed when/if something goes wrong. I did that with the EVO qualifiers and I regret it now.

At the end of the day, as I said in the original thread : If you just want to play games with people, then the committee will not affect you in any way. It should hopefully make things better.

If you want to run an event, go for it. You'll be able to get assistance.

We want the community the community to grow and we will what we can to help it grow.

ayjayirl

blag wrote: »

That probably is due to the fact that people don't think a committee is necessary.

Abstinence from posting on the topic is not really acceptable imho. You should express your opinion on this crucial matter. I repeatedly suggested that everyone throw in their 2 cents. Saying that a lack of posting is indicative of no one wanting it is a false assumption and one that doesn't hold up to the rigors of argument - for or against. (Not havin a go at you Blag - it just isn't a fair argument)

BTW - I knew the dictator would eventually take control of the issue and tbh, its about time. There are many pro's and con's to forming this structure and it boils down to (I feel like I am repeating myself) what people want to do with this community.

If you want transparency for monies, possible sponsorship, points of call to organisations outside the community (formal with respect to events etc), and/or speedier organistion for scheduling of event etc then this is the best way to do that. If people disagree with that, then provide a viable alternative. I am all ears - seriously. When I suggested a committee it was with a view for responsibility, not control. The bi-annual elections for change are a good idea as it involves anyone & everyone in the community. When certain people are transparently responsible for different aspects and elements of this community it drives innovative thinking, new ideas/suggestions taken through to completion. You could even have a weekly/monthly issue topic for points of discussion to be brought up to the meetings. If someone is not happy with how its run, then there should be a mechanism for voicing that concern (maybe in a sticky topic that should only be used for such instances).

Are there any other viable alternatives? If so, then the podium is yours. Constructivly think of how to take the community forward and suggest an alternative. For my two cents on the way is has been currently run, I found the following as issues:

1) Voting on every issue is never going to suit everyone and even with that, its rare that everyone actually contributes (*points to Blags post about a lack of posts on the offishul thread

2) No organisation will deal with a community without a transparent structure for dealing with us - This isn't even a contested point really

3) I am not happy (nothing to do with the person) with how the money is handled. Such concerns require an official responsibility imo

Whats the big concern here anyway??????? That le-dictator will start doing things that we all dont like???? Who would go then? Its counter productive! In the old system if someone put something forward that no one wanted, it didn't get off the ground - nor would it with this structure


One small point - I think Sisko should be on the committee. Seconded anyone???? He has put alot of effort into promoting it and has been actively involved.

Dreddybajs

I disagree, I'm happy with the people named now. I could just as well say oh I should be on the committee, or any number of other people. Either vote and give people a choice or leave it with the people we have at the moment (who afaik everyone is happy with). I'm sure Sisko realises that not being on the committee doesn't stop him from helping out the community in any way really, as am I.

Sisko

Nah it's be silly me being on this commitee after all this , it'd make me look bad too, thats not what I'm talking about here. But cheers though

I agree that our dictator should have and was right to take action in the end.

I'm just saying, that action should have been a 'right we have to do this now, the decision is being made by friday, this week you the community get to help make that decsion here are some polls'

Instead of 'heres is the comittee'

It was always spoken about in that original thread that it'd be a community thing and not down to a single person unless I'm totally insane? I'm mean am I really being that off the wall here?

ayjayirl

Its simple - in order to convince people that are on the fence or against that this is the best thing, then the committee must be voted upon.

This is very simply done really. A sticky nominations thread to close after one week...... When this is done, the 10 (or whatever number) people that were nominated are put into another Sticky thread to vote one - again for a one week period. All posted should be voting or nomination only. After that, we have a committee. Then, as Azza suggested, every 6 months we can vote to change it. This allows for rotation. You could also stipulate that if a member of the committee has been on it for 2 consecutive periods, then they are excluded from the third. This isn't rocket science. Its basic democracy.

So as I see it we need 3 voting mechanisms.

1) Whether to form a committee (an actual vote - not a discussion topic)

2) (If first vote passes) Nominations for a 5 member committee

3) An actual vote for committee members from the pool of nominations

You can ignore the second one if needs be and just get everyone to vote for a committee member and the top 5 wins. Then this can be done every 6 months...... This ensure that no one is left out and also means that there is commitment and involvement from active members

I call on the MODS to implement this - earn your keep! Make the voting threads, Its certainly better than defacto nominations by Azza (consensus as they may be, with a vote you eliminate any neigh sayers to the selection)

ayjayirl

Sisko wrote: »

Nah it's be silly me being on this commitee after all this , it'd make me look bad too, thats not what I'm talking about here. But cheers though

Ah humility - the hallmark of a leader

Anyway, there is no "all this". You had valid concerns, raised them, and followed through on your discussion. Thats more to be said than a lot of other people (myself included) on this forum.

The one thing that will surely kill anything - Apathy. You have demonstrated that this is not a concern when talking about you . The same is true for alot of people on this (except Azza).

Bottom line, I am think we need this committee. I am not supporting, however, one that is formed by decision rather than a vote.

Xinkai

Some of the things being said in this thread seem to be dividing the community now... I call for three things, one of which to be picked:

1. Lock the thread, finalize the committee.
2. Forget about the committee, & just go on as normal, just get 2-3 people to help out at tournaments.
3. Have a vote for people to be on the committee.

Any way this works out though ALL of us should have a say in what goes on anyways. Ok, as i said the names up there are good, but What if 5 people on the committee are for an idea, but 6 not on the committee are against? Your gonna have trouble because 6 people with no authority are gonna get pissed but since 'the board' is for the idea it gets passed. In my opinion this idea is looking like one big mess, and one big disaster waiting to happen.

Were here to play some games, not turn it into another dail.

Sabre0001

Would have said Sisko and / or mr_kyle on the committee too - both have worked hard to push things further and get their groups noticed. mr_kyle also has seasons of experience behind him and could add another layer of expertise.

ayjayirl

Xinkai wrote: »

Some of the things being said in this thread seem to be dividing the community now... I call for three things, one of which to be picked:

1. Lock the thread, finalize the committee.
2. Forget about the committee, & just go on as normal, just get 2-3 people to help out at tournaments.
3. Have a vote for people to be on the committee.

Any way this works out though ALL of us should have a say in what goes on anyways. Ok, as i said the names up there are good, but What if 5 people on the committee are for an idea, but 6 not on the committee are against? Your gonna have trouble because 6 people with no authority are gonna get pissed but since 'the board' is for the idea it gets passed. In my opinion this idea is looking like one big mess, and one big disaster waiting to happen.

Were here to play some games, not turn it into another dail.

A non point really. The mechanism for change of committee would be there. These will be elected officials (=p) of the club/soc/community and such will be acting in the best interests of it. It would be the job of said committee (not board - I'll explain the difference to you if you so wish) to act on the will of the community not dictate to it.


Give me an example of what you are talking about. A situation whereby a committee over rules the wishes of the community. You say that maybe 6 people disagree with the committee of 5.... what about the other 60? (or whatever the number is). The idea here is that they will represent the consensus. After all, why would they act in such a manner when they can just be voted out twice within the year. This is the whole reason for this re-election.

P.S. Referring to this as a board implies a subversive attempt to undermine the integrity of what is being proposed. Its best left out it really.

Orim

I still believe that an organisational body (call it what you will) is necessary for the community to continue and grow. If not put everything to a vote as Ayjay has said. I would suggest two simultaneous votes - whether to create the committee and who should be on the committee. Deadline to be on the day of Inferno (Saturday 5th of June)

However I wish to withdraw myself from the committee and wish whomever is on it the best of luck.

ayjayirl

MODS

2 polls

Go

Jazzy

is there really a need for polls? if there wasnt a poll, would people really be upset? what things like this need are less 'rules' and stipulations and less sh1tting about. give the lads a chance and if it goes all so wrong (which I doubt) then yeah, make a big deal about it then, but as it stands - there is no need to make any sort of fuss out of it

ayjayirl

You're missing the point. Without a democratic procedure, it can't happen. Its very simple, if most vote for the 5 Azza suggested then so be it, no probs but that decision is rigorously challenged to be fair through a vote.

Jazzy

ayjayirl wrote: »

Without a democratic procedure, it can't happen.

um, yes it can?

animaX

Who says democracy is all that good anyway?!

China had the only growing economy during the recession :rolleyes:

ayjayirl

Jazzy wrote: »

um, yes it can?

By not having the democratic procedures in place you will alienate people. I mean sisko felt it and I would consider him a regular and active community member. You cannot dictate how people will feel or think about something. With a vote you allow people to have their say and as such an acceptance of the committee as it is fair, balanced and can be changed through a proper mechanism. I am one of the original posters on actually doing something like this and I am whole-heartedly against it being done incorrectly without voting.


Many a country was 'formed' out of no vote and the last thing anyone wants is a division within. That would be totally counter productive and completely against my original posting thought.

ayjayirl

animaX wrote: »

Who says democracy is all that good anyway?!

China had the only growing economy during the recession :rolleyes:

Not to digress into economics but that has more to do with lose financial regulation on the part of these 'democracies' rather than a symptom of the type of government.


anyway - watch as China enters into the worst recession in its history (I'd say betwee 3 - 5 years) without the capability to come out of it. You heard it here first. They have some real problems that will only become apparent later.

Jazzy

is there a problem with any of the lads named? i mean, do they really have to be elected by the people and for the people? the lads are obviously comfortable in the fact that they have the right group to get the job done, so let them get on with it. if it turns to sh1t, then yeah, go for a poll or something or change something around. but a poll right now seems needless and if people are going to get annoyed about being left out of the loop, then they need a reality check in fairness.

animaX

Jazzy wrote: »

is there a problem with any of the lads named? i mean, do they really have to be elected by the people and for the people? the lads are obviously comfortable in the fact that they have the right group to get the job done, so let them get on with it.

I totally agree with this. We have the right people in the committee, let them get on with it. If somebody seriously objects to any one of the names, start a poll to have them democratically replaced. Otherwise, lets get on with saturdays work

ayjayirl

Jazzy wrote: »

is there a problem with any of the lads named? i mean, do they really have to be elected by the people and for the people? the lads are obviously comfortable in the fact that they have the right group to get the job done, so let them get on with it. if it turns to sh1t, then yeah, go for a poll or something or change something around. but a poll right now seems needless and if people are going to get annoyed about being left out of the loop, then they need a reality check in fairness.

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. My point isn't, and never has been, that the guys mentioned wouldn't be up to the task but the only way to know if everyone has the same view is to vote on it. By doing so, you remove anyone arguing against the way in which it was implemented.

I am talking about the process, not the people. It must be clear, transparent and defined. Otherwise you run the risk of losing the interest of 'some' community members - me included. And I say that with the caveat that it has nothing to do with the 5 guys, just the manner in which they were 'nominated'.

Yreval

I will just say two things right now:

- I think this "Irish Fighting Game Association", or whatever you want to call it, is a good idea and needs to happen forthwith. I think most of us agree on this matter.
- mr_kyle should be on the committee of such an organisation - his years of experience running FG events in Belfast will be invaluable.

Jazzy

ayjayirl wrote: »

My point isn't, and never has been, that the guys mentioned wouldn't be up to the task but the only way to know if everyone has the same view is to vote on it.

not everyone is going to have the same view though, thats obvious. i think you are making a mountain out of a molehill and I dont understand why. when this site started back in 98, they didnt have a vote about who was going to run it and so forth, they just did it. when there is justification for having a vote then yeah, have a vote. but the analogy of countries is incorrect, this is a lot closer to a business if you are going to come up with an accurate comparison.

im sure if the lads need help then they will get it from the very resourceful and passionate people in this community. but what they dont need so that you can enjoy tournaments and events, is red tape, beaurocracy and needless analysis of who and what they are.

just dont think about it that much and it will all be good

ayjayirl

Jazzy wrote: »

not everyone is going to have the same view though, thats obvious. i think you are making a mountain out of a molehill and I dont understand why. when this site started back in 98, they didnt have a vote about who was going to run it and so forth, they just did it. when there is justification for having a vote then yeah, have a vote. but the analogy of countries is incorrect, this is a lot closer to a business if you are going to come up with an accurate comparison.

im sure if the lads need help then they will get it from the very resourceful and passionate people in this community. but what they dont need so that you can enjoy tournaments and events, is red tape, beaurocracy and needless analysis of who and what they are.

just dont think about it that much and it will all be good

Man you sooo miss the point.

....and my analogy of the country was put in to highlight that when people are not happy that they have a say in forming an official structure to an organisation (or country) that they are involved in, then they will not participate fully. This isn't even an ambiguous point. As such, a company analogy would be erroneous.

I can see your point of view of saying 'lads, calm down, the guys are grand, lets just do it........' That's pretty much what is happening now. The whole point of this was to imply a more formalised concept (i.e. committee) to take this to the next step and the only way, I'll repeat that for the slow amongst us, the only way to do that is to use a system that allows everyone to have input. By doing this, those voted, would be responsible for 'X' and as such accountable. This would incentivise them to act properly and fulfil the role to which they have been granted by the community as a whole.

As for your analogy for this site in 98....... Doesn't really hold up. Boards is a community forum...... thats all boards is - a facilitator. What we are talking about here is taking this outside of just a boards forum to something bigger better faster etc etc etc. An autonomous unit established in order to create something from the vast array of talent in this country within this field.

Dreddybajs

ayjayirl wrote: »

As for your analogy for this site in 98....... Doesn't really hold up. Boards is a community forum...... thats all boards is - a facilitator. What we are talking about here is taking this outside of just a boards forum to something bigger better faster etc etc etc. An autonomous unit established in order to create something from the vast array of talent in this country within this field.

boards started as a quake forum so it completely holds up

ayjayirl

Dreddybajs wrote: »

boards started as a quake forum so it completely holds up

A moot point

Jazzy

ayjayirl wrote: »

Man you sooo miss the point.

....and my analogy of the country was put in to highlight that when people are not happy that they have a say in forming an official structure to an organisation (or country) that they are involved in, then they will not participate fully. This isn't even an ambiguous point. As such, a company analogy would be erroneous.

I can see your point of view of saying 'lads, calm down, the guys are grand, lets just do it........' That's pretty much what is happening now. The whole point of this was to imply a more formalised concept (i.e. committee) to take this to the next step and the only way, I'll repeat that for the slow amongst us, the only way to do that is to use a system that allows everyone to have input. By doing this, those voted, would be responsible for 'X' and as such accountable. This would incentivise them to act properly and fulfil the role to which they have been granted by the community as a whole.

As for your analogy for this site in 98....... Doesn't really hold up. Boards is a community forum...... thats all boards is - a facilitator. What we are talking about here is taking this outside of just a boards forum to something bigger better faster etc etc etc. An autonomous unit established in order to create something from the vast array of talent in this country within this field.

oh right. all I can really say is, you dont get it, you wont get it and you dont seem to want to get it either. saying how i 'miss the point' isnt relative when you dont understand what the point is yourself fyi.



and after reading IRC just there, yeah, drama over nothing at all. get on with it, have gg's on saturday and see what the lay of the land is then