As requested, I invite you into a virtual livingroom.

Submitted by Jeff P. on November 16, 2006 - 2:19pm.

tags:

Organizational Development

I will be the first to admit that my dismay for what the London Commons has become has interupted the beauty of what this site has to offer.

I would like to suggest that we use this space to discuss the major structural problems that have arisen on the London Commons. In addition I would like to point out the inconsistencies (decisions being made by authorities that apparently do not exist - myself being one of them) that have developed due to a lack of formalised structure.

Many people on this site have found wonderful uses for it. Unfortunetly, when people point out major problems with what has been developing recently, they are quickly burried and ignored by those perpetuating/ignoring the problems.

I would like to ask as politely as possible that we use this space to further the dialogue on what seems be a turning point in the direction of the London Commons as a community space.

I would also like to ask everyone if they know of any good links to articles that may have solutions to what is a seemingly systemic problem.

I would suggest Jo Freemans, Tyranny of Structurelessness as a starting point. It is a very quick read and it provides wonderful insight into the problems that arise from having a lack of formalised structure when developing a community organisation.

I ask these questions out of love for what site was/(*edit* - is) and the potential for it to become again. If this thread helps to expose some of the problems and you feel the general readership should be aware of, I ask that you vote it to the front page. If not, I understand.

Thank-you

Jeff

Average:

No votes yet

Trackback URL for this post:

http://www.londoncommons.net/trackback/1641

I still do not believe that

Submitted by alex homanchuk (not verified) on November 16, 2006 - 8:57pm.

I still do not believe that the situation is critical, but it is apparent that a fair amount of tension has been caused by organizational issues and generally differences between what people believe should be the mission and vision of the site. I think the content rules for the front page need to be resolved & revised soon; either through implementing some form of ranking system or as Jeff suggests trying to get the larger membership to participate in developing rules (a lengthier and more difficult proposition, but perhaps more worthwhile in the long-term). I have said before that I wish the forums were used more for organization (LC and other groups), which is where I attempted to engage people in participating in discussion surrounding the organization of Food Not Bombs. I also believe there is plenty of room on the LC for discussion that falls outside of the activist variety, like bad humour, but this should be relegated to forums. The front page is the public face of the London Commons, and it behooves us to ensure that content that is posted here is material that is thoughtful and relevant to the larger community that we know visits the site. The site has been used traditionally for those looking for information on, or wishing to participate in (for lack of a better term ‘progressive’) activities. Perhaps, I am making too many assumptions about our users interests, but I do believe the more the front page begins to resemble ‘face book’; the more visitors will disregard it entirely. I know that some of the “lurkers” I’ve suggested the LC too were looking for a site to find out what was happening in the activist community in London. Again, I don’t think this site should be limited to a narrow group of people but it shouldn’t mean that we lose the value that it already has as an information hub.

------------------------------------
"First, let me make it very clear - poor people aren't necessarily killers" - G.W. Bush

perhaps not critical

Submitted by aaron lawrence on November 17, 2006 - 4:23pm.

Hi Alex,

So perhaps we've been carried away by the drama of critical turning point, but surely you would agree that the nature of the decision itself is critical not only for the organisational structure of the site, but also in terms of this sites attempts at fostering non-hierarchical community.

I really appreciate your comment that, "the front page is the public face of the London Commons, and it behooves us to ensure that content that is posted here is material that is thoughtful and relevant to the larger community that we know visits the site." However, I am curious to whom you're refer to as "us." I am interpreting it as any user of this site, which I think is bang on. There is certainly an element of responsibility for any user of a public site like this to ensure that when they are submitting something for the front page, that it is appropriate, thoughtful and thought provoking.

Aaron

the great debate

Submitted by aaron lawrence on November 16, 2006 - 4:42pm.

I think you're right about the LC being at a possible turning point in terms of it's structure, and the range of users that it seeks to appeal to. I am elated. That this site in a little over a year has managed to attract enough attention to merit this debate is impressive.

However, it seems to me that of the broad range of users who use the LC, the majority are what have been called silent members or 'lurkers,' myself included. If we are going to have this discussion, it would seem to me to be critical to involve as many as possible.

For that reason, I am wondering if it is possible to gather the wide range of opinions and posts that have already been proferred on this topic and consolidate the debate in one place? Perhaps as a seperate forum, as has been suggested, and as you are following up on?

I think that structurally, having this discussion scattered throughout various polls/blogs/post places certain users at a disadvantage. I am a student, which gives me ample internet access, and currently ample time to go searching, but for the rest who aren't in this position, the time required to engage in this debate seems to me to be prohibitive.

That's a great suggestion Aaron

Submitted by Jeff P. on November 17, 2006 - 11:21am.

I would love to tackle such a request but I'm slammed with school work right now (as are you I'm sure). Maybe we could try a collaborative effort on this one.

I don't know how effective it would be to use an ongoing thread (numerous reply's will create a lot of scrolling to sift through for the info) for updates.

Instead, when I find more history on the subject, I will edit this reply with the newest reference. I will clearly indicate the time and date of the edit to keep an accurate record of the findings. Jeremy, do you have any suggestions for a more effective way to organise this collaborative project?

If we each use our own reply 'space' we could probable assemble a rough list of our findings and quickly cross reference to other peoples' reply's with minimal effort. Once we have a substantial list, we can then try to organise it into a chronological sequence on one post.

What do people think?

It would be great if the more experienced LC users could start their own reply to aid the process(*edit* - I would like to encourage everyone to help out with this. By 'more experienced' I meant those users who have engaged in previous dialogues on the subject) . Some of you seem to cruise through this site like a phone book.

Jeff
______________________________________________________________________________
November 17, 2006 - 11:20 am

September 6 2006-The first suggestion that I can remember right now would be found in the minutes of our last organisational development meeting.

________________________________________________________________________

**The new Forum that Aaron has suggested we create can be found here.**