HRWiki talk:STUFF'd Project Activities Control League

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Pick A Name?)
m (Comments, etc.: Updating sig.)
Line 18: Line 18:
:<s>I'll join if it was approved. If not, then...well, the page will be deleted by an admin. --[[User:acekirby13|<font color=green>acekirby13</font color>]]|<sup>[[User talk:acekirby13|<font color=green>My Talk</font color>]]</sup>  18:24, 14 May 2005 (UTC)</s>
:<s>I'll join if it was approved. If not, then...well, the page will be deleted by an admin. --[[User:acekirby13|<font color=green>acekirby13</font color>]]|<sup>[[User talk:acekirby13|<font color=green>My Talk</font color>]]</sup>  18:24, 14 May 2005 (UTC)</s>
-
Are you sure that this fits the title? I mean, "''Lobby those with power ([[Special:Listadmins|listed here]]) to get rid of [[HRWiki:WikiTroll|WikiTrolls]]''" seems a bit more than what this page is about, and then this ("''Lobby for the creation of a perminent Fun Fact Validation Committee with sysop powers.''") shows that this isn't the committee, this is the committee forming committee! The entire [[HRWiki:STUFF'd Project Activities Control League#Core Beliefs and Goals|core beliefs and goals]] section is questionable, meaning the entire page (and the talk page, apart from the comments section) is questionable! Also, I think you mean '''10'''th May 2005, not 20th. --[[User:Venusy|<font face="Joystix">Venusy</font>]] <sub><tt>([[User talk:Venusy|Talk]])([[Special:Contributions/Venusy|Contributions]])</tt></sub>, 20:43, 14 May 2005 (BST)
+
Are you sure that this fits the title? I mean, "''Lobby those with power ([[Special:Listadmins|listed here]]) to get rid of [[HRWiki:WikiTroll|WikiTrolls]]''" seems a bit more than what this page is about, and then this ("''Lobby for the creation of a perminent Fun Fact Validation Committee with sysop powers.''") shows that this isn't the committee, this is the committee forming committee! The entire [[HRWiki:STUFF'd Project Activities Control League#Core Beliefs and Goals|core beliefs and goals]] section is questionable, meaning the entire page (and the talk page, apart from the comments section) is questionable! Also, I think you mean '''10'''th May 2005, not 20th. --{{User:Venusy/Sig}}, 20:43, 14 May 2005 (BST)
:Whoa, I didn't see that. I don't think that lobbying for sysop powers is wise. I'ma think I'll stay away from this one. --[[User:acekirby13|<font color=green>acekirby13</font color>]]|<sup>[[User talk:acekirby13|<font color=green>My Talk</font color>]]</sup>  19:54, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
:Whoa, I didn't see that. I don't think that lobbying for sysop powers is wise. I'ma think I'll stay away from this one. --[[User:acekirby13|<font color=green>acekirby13</font color>]]|<sup>[[User talk:acekirby13|<font color=green>My Talk</font color>]]</sup>  19:54, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:56, 19 May 2005

Contents

By-Laws

The full list will be forthcoming. Please add ideas if you have them.

Proposed By-Laws

Officers

Committee Chair: The Real Zajac
Vice-Chair: <Vacant>

Membership

All registered members are eligiable to join, but may be barred for misconduct. Simply add your name to the list, plus date of joining.

Roster

The Real Zajac 10 May 2005

Comments, etc.

Umm... Is this sanctioned by Tom or Joey Day? Also, you meantioned that this commitee was formed on May 20th, 2005. Likely a typo? Thunderbird 00:58, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

I'll join if it was approved. If not, then...well, the page will be deleted by an admin. --acekirby13|My Talk 18:24, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Are you sure that this fits the title? I mean, "Lobby those with power (listed here) to get rid of WikiTrolls" seems a bit more than what this page is about, and then this ("Lobby for the creation of a perminent Fun Fact Validation Committee with sysop powers.") shows that this isn't the committee, this is the committee forming committee! The entire core beliefs and goals section is questionable, meaning the entire page (and the talk page, apart from the comments section) is questionable! Also, I think you mean 10th May 2005, not 20th. --videlectrix.pngENUSY discussionitem_icon.gif user.gifmail_icon.gif, 20:43, 14 May 2005 (BST)

Whoa, I didn't see that. I don't think that lobbying for sysop powers is wise. I'ma think I'll stay away from this one. --acekirby13|My Talk 19:54, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
Okay, I think this is going a bit far. The Real Zajac asked Joey Day if there could be a committee to monitor the STUFF page, and he said okay. A committee to monitor STUFF (remove old facts, etc.) sounds fine to me too. That... is not this. For one thing, why does there need to be a "fun facts validation committee" with sysop powers? Right now we have the fun facts evaluated by the whole Wiki community, which is far more in line with the spirit of a Wiki than one committee evaluating facts. Also, why does one need sysop powers to evaluate fun facts? Secondly, "lobby those with power to get rid of WikiTrolls"? What the crap? The sysops do get rid of Wiki Trolls, and other people should too. It's not like there's some permanent "Trolls Off" button that the admins have failed to press... as long as there is a Wiki, troll edits must be reverted, and anyone can (and should!) help. Finally, what's with all the bureaucracy, bylaws and whatnot? Why in the world would there be a need for a bylaw process? This just seems like it will lead to some bizarre, arcane structure of power that goes against Wiki philosophy. Aurora the Homestar Coder 01:38, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
I'ma have to agree with Aurora. I'm not really liking this committee. It's nicely formed and worded, but I don't think it serves much use, actually. And it doesn't seem to be going anywhere, seeing as the only "member" is the creator himself. →FireBird
There's no denying the STUFF page desperately needs to be organized, but you've taken this committee a bit far. If you get rid of some of these silly policies and proposals, this committee could work. However, there's no need for offices, sysop powers, etc. This committee needs major reworking. Here are some changes that may help:
  • Change the name to STUFF Help and Management Committee - not as catchy, but it makes the purpose of the committee a lot clearer.
  • Add Major Tasks in place of Core Beliefs and Goals. Major Tasks would be:
    • Formatting the STUFF page
    • Helping users with questions regarding STUFF
    • Promoting the use of STUFF when necessary
  • Keep the history
  • Add a section on the Basics of STUFF. This would inform people on how to STUFF facts, formatting standards, etc.
  • Remove all the committee info on the Talk page. Add a list of Current Members on the main page.
Basically, this should be modeled after the other committee pages, the Welcoming Committee for example.
-DMurphy 04:18, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
Yea, I'm with Murphy. Definently no 'positions', or else it all turns into a big power grab. There shouldn't be anyone who has special say or authority anywhere on the wiki (with the possible exception of Joey, but even he rarely goes ahead with something without wiki support). And the history is kinda good, but needs to be reworked in a few places to be more factual, less goofy, and more... NPOV. Thunderbird 07:52, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
Yes, this was initially sanctioned by myself (not that my sanction means much with respect to the wiki way), but I guess I should've been more clear about what I was sanctioning. I did suggest a better name: "Fun Fact Review Committee". I personally think the name "SPACL" is dreadful (I never liked "STUFF" either). I'm pretty much opposed to the idea of bylaws, officers, and all that jazz. So far all our committees have been pretty loosely organized. As the other sysops and I have discussed committees, we've always agreed that committees are great for increasing members feelings of belonging. Folks should be free to add, remove, and vote on fun facts whether they belong to this committee or not. The committee is just a way for someone to say "I belong, I do stuff around here," and the committee page should serve as a hub for committee members to organize their efforts. Elevating one wikizen over another by creating ranks and positions goes directly against the wiki way. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 17:40, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Pulled from The Stick until it gets an overhaul

I'm pulling this off The Stick until it gets refactored. I suggest it get a new (not so wacky) name and a new mission statement. Anyone who wants to try their hand, feel free, or you can make suggestions here and I'll work them into the page myself. — wikisig.gif Joey (talk·edits) 22:45, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Picking Names

Anyone wanna figure out a name for this? I don't mind 'Fun Fact Review Committee' or 'Fun Fact Control Committee', or something. Any other suggestions for where to move to? Thunderbird 01:26, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Personal tools