Media WIGMEDIA: I Stand For Admin

Remove this Banner Ad

If anything mate it's getting clearer we're moving towards a committee led league. Don't be surprised if Ant Bear is the last admin.
I don't think so, people said after Hate that the role is nearing an end and then by the end of my run the admin position was back in vogue. Just need an admin to have more involvement and leadership for people to see its value.
 
Great question SM.

If I was admin, and there was a subject up for discusion, it would have a deadline. If the issue wasn't resolved by said deadline, I, as Admin, would then cast a vote.

Nah, last two members to vote.
We sort it like this.

ZA58.gif
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #78
If anything mate it's getting clearer we're moving towards a committee led league. Don't be surprised if Ant Bear is the last admin.
That's fine, and I'm not against it.

Is he the last admin because some people want it so?

Why is it so after a long period? Because some people are upset?



Maybe the admin needs less power/say. But I think there is a place for someone as a tiebreaker. Otherwise, how do you decide it?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I don't think so, people said after Hate that the role is nearing an end and then by the end of my run the admin position was back in vogue. Just need an admin to have more involvement and leadership for people to see its value.

That's fine, and I'm not against it.

Is he the last admin because some people want it so?

Why is it so after a long period? Because some people are upset?



Maybe the admin needs less power/say. But I think there is a place for someone as a tiebreaker. Otherwise, how do you decide it?

All I'll say is this.


 
Why not have an admin and vice admin then?

Admin has a vision for the league and enacts policies.

Vice admin does all the awards and administrative work. Someone like TIF, he likes making pretty graphics.
JNyQncH.png
 
I don't think so, people said after Hate that the role is nearing an end and then by the end of my run the admin position was back in vogue. Just need an admin to have more involvement and leadership for people to see its value.

Weird for EJW to like a post essentially arguing against his proposed model of an admin.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #84
In my first act, I've decided to remove the West Coast Wonders from the league because the entire club is a bit silly. :)
Cooooooooool, cool cool cool cool cool.

I'll remove interchange.
 
I don't think so, people said after Hate that the role is nearing an end and then by the end of my run the admin position was back in vogue. Just need an admin to have more involvement and leadership for people to see its value.

So you're saying you're a bit of a hero?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #90
Didn't you say that as admin you'd leave votes until they got a majority?

12 Angry Men style?
I also said, if needed/forced, I'd vote. I'd just PREFER the clubs to make the call.

Just after clubs were shitty that they didn't have the call.
 
I also said, if needed/forced, I'd vote. I'd just PREFER the clubs to make the call.

Just after clubs were shitty that they didn't have the call.

Clubs were the reason expansion didn't get up. Ant Bear wanted it.
 
I also said, if needed/forced, I'd vote. I'd just PREFER the clubs to make the call.

Just after clubs were shitty that they didn't have the call.

I know, I'm just spitballing. I know it's been brought up in recent seasons. The committee could vote in a committee spokesman from their ranks. Run the awards etc as a team. In a vote system run off consensus (all-SFA etc). For any other actual vote you're voting to change something that's established essentially so why do you need a tiebreaker? A majority changes something and a tie means things stay the same. No accusations of agendas for the spokesman. No needless campaigns. The clubs are responsible for their own level of contribution based upon who their member is. Smarter people than me could contribute a more defined framework that would definitely double as an alternative.
 
I know, I'm just spitballing. I know it's been brought up in recent seasons. The committee could vote in a committee spokesman from their ranks. Run the awards etc as a team. In a vote system run off consensus (all-SFA etc). For any other actual vote you're voting to change something that's established essentially so why do you need a tiebreaker? A majority changes something and a tie means things stay the same. No accusations of agendas for the spokesman. No needless campaigns. The clubs are responsible for their own level of contribution based upon who their member is. Smarter people than me could contribute a more defined framework that would definitely double as an alternative.

That assumes clubs are willing to contribute

How many votes did we have where the full 12 didn't vote?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #98
I do disagree with EJW on the "they can fight til someone changes" part, I would definitely have the admin be the 13th vote if required.
I clearly said if forced I would vote, but that I would PREFER that the committee come to a decision.

Nice to misrepresent though. Situation normal.
 
I clearly said if forced I would vote, but that I would PREFER that the committee come to a decision.

Nice to misrepresent though. Situation normal.

You've had to say this to three different people, reckon maybe the issue was with your delivery not our interpretation?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Media WIGMEDIA: I Stand For Admin

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top