EmptyMessage board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 1 member: Donny Boy; 11 anonymousDiscussion: Dave Dowell
| Posted | Discussion |
| Jan. 21 JohnO28 Men's 50 107 posts | Dave, I have seen you state many times in multiple posts that when rules are discussed anything discussed on the message board is automatically disallowed. Can I ask why that is? This is the one place people all over the country who otherwise couldn't make it to those meetings can come together and occasionally have a rational discussion before they go off the rails as most do. I know you and whoever is in charge of using the SSUSA Staff username read these on a daily basis. Why not take what is discussed into consideration during these meetings when people spend the time to make their opinions on what could make things better. Now I know most of what is discussed on here doesn't reference rules and most threads get out of hand but when serious real concerns, Ideas etc are voice why wouldn't they be taken into consideration? John |
| Jan. 21 DaveDowell Men's 70 4322 posts | John028 ... Fair question ... The primary reason for the policy is that we don't require Message Board posters to "ID" themselves here and, accordingly, we are not interested in having to sort out the fact from the fiction authors in this largely unregulated and anonymous environment ... Some posters DO choose to identify, but it's not a requirement ... In this age of easy electronic communication, if the item is of sufficient importance to the author, we believe that suggestions for inclusion on the official Agenda of the National Rules Committee should be clear as to their originating author ... Donna accumulates every single properly submitted suggested rule change proposal throughout the season, sorts and categorizes them in a pre-committee meeting correspondence package for the members of the Committee, and distributes it for our review ... She does a tremendous job with that process, and I can't imagine how difficult and inefficient it would be if she had to cull through thousands of (sometimes non-sensical, contradictory and redundant) posts here to build the draft Agenda ... The quality of the proposals we receive is very high, and we deeply appreciate the effort expended by those who participate ... But I suspect we're not likely to open the process up to random anonymous commentary ... Thanks for asking ... |
| Jan. 21 JohnO28 Men's 50 107 posts | thanks for the answer. |
| Jan. 23 outtashape3 Men's 65 23 posts | Solution would be to require everyone to ID themselves. That probably would do away with some of the idiotic stuff that is on here. |
| Jan. 23 DaveDowell Men's 70 4322 posts | outtashape3 ... Although I believe your suggestion on requiring "ID" is an excellent one, it's a non-starter ... Ownership here believes strongly, and I concur, in unrestricted (subject to just four simple posting rules) freedom of the press, and it's unlikely to change ... Those who wish to comment while hiding behind the cloak of anonymity are certainly free to do so ... But they have no reciprocal expectation that we will give any credence to that commentary ... |
| Jan. 23 MurrayW Men's 65 221 posts | Johan028, I see this message board as a good place to see if a rule change proposal has support and for others to voice their pros and cons. If I were proposing a rule change, I would post it here and wait for the discussion. If there was adequate support for it or I felt very strongly about it, I would send it in officially to get considered at the annual rules meeting. My official proposal might include the number of people supporting and against this rule change. It may be unofficial, but it might also hold some weight if you included in the rule change proposal that 89/94 posters (made up numbers) support this rule change. |
