When I have thought about making a particular motion that would affect a particular forum, I have extended for comment to the moderators of that forum. I think that has worked fine... I also know other mods have been extended the same courtesy by other members.

Other than that, I believe there is a distinction between the groups that need to remain.

In regards to members, we do need to more. I had suggested at one point about announcing via ANNOUNCEMENT threads in other forums more about what we do, but there was concern over too many announcements. I try to visit chat as often as possible to hear what members are talking about. I have a number of "friends" that I bounce ideas off of and get their input.

Can we do more? Certainly. I do believe that many members are here for the experience no matter what it is and will not take an active role. But you know what, that is OK as well.

William

I am starting to lean toward koko's position on openness. :eek:

I do agree that the current system leaves much to be desired from a communication standpoint, as all the general members get is voting records and someone needs to pro-actively solicit comments from TalkBoard members if they are interested in the “whys” behind a particular decision. Obviously, the process is slowly evolving toward more transparency, but I can see a need for further openness.

This also impacts the elections. Outside of looking at voting records and the occasional comments made in the public TalkBoard forum (which usually relate to controversial decisions), we really have no information on the thought processes of TalkBoard incumbents. Of course, they do provide such insight during the debate process, but it would be useful to be able to look at the TalkBoard discussions from a third-party point of view.

“Throw it open to everyone” is the simple and inelegant solution, which doesn't address the (presumably very infrequent) need for private deliberations. Having TalkBoard members restate and retype their discussions in public for each vote, is, to be blunt, a waste of their time and idiotic (not that they shouldn't do it). There is a happy medium somewhere, but this candidate needs to spend more time pondering it.

I would like to see a greater deal of communication between TalkBoard and moderators. I think its important to solicit feedback from moderators when new forums are created or existing forums are reconsidered so that TalkBoard has a view of the issues that could be resolved (or that might spring up) if an action is taken.

I would also like to see TalkBoard and the general membership have more frequent and open communications. I'd like to see TalkBoard actively solicit feedback from the community through polls, town hall chats, and other means.

>Do you offer suggestions that the link between TalkBoard and moderators
>get closer?

I don't know that it needs to get closer, but it should always be a communal relationship that allows both parties to do their work together.


>Do you offer suggestions that communication between general membership
>and the elected TalkBoard get closer?

Yes, I think the general membership should always be able to use the TalkBoard as a 'Talk Sounding Board' if you will, as an elected member I need to know the pulse of the membership at large.

Hi Folks,

Since we are talking about communications I was a bit miffed at why I had received my TalkMail newsletter but I cant see any mention of the TalkBoard Election Debate/Discussion.

Maybe this is an oversight but this is the sort of thing that some folk have mentioned about better communications.

I really think that this has been a missed opportunity to inform all the subscribbers of TalkMail about the debate/discussion.

Could I ask that a "Special Election Edition" be sent out if possible.

Regards