Posted by Stained Glass on June 20, 2002 at 03:18:32:
In Reply to: Constable posted by Theif on June 18, 2002 at 20:10:33:
: I know for the most part the Constable has been in the background and doing a good job. The thing is most people here now I don't think have been around long enough to know what happened with the office nor have they had any say about their repetitive in this matter.
This is the point that most people seem to have missed. The Constable does not dominate or control the list in any way. He has no more power over the list than you or me. He simply there to provide an impartial decision on matters that threaten the security of the list.
And 'background' is a key word as well. The Constable rarely has to do anything as he only appears in the most extreme of circumstances. If you have a problem with him then it will not be a petty matter. What has annoyed me about this matter is that rather than resolve the problem diplomatically (ie. PR the Constable and explain your problem) many members decided to attack the whole position of Constable. I personally felt that Fixxxer deserved a second chance. But the lack of respect shown to the more prominent members of the list (ie. John Meehan, the guy who runs it for starters!) left me with little sympathy.
: Maybe we should have the position up for vote or at least a talk once a year or so. What is everyone else's thoughts on this?
This is probably how it works already but I agree that a vote might put more confidence in the newer members. However, retaining anonymity is the problem. Few of us will be inclined to take up the position, and even fewer will if the whole list knows who the Constable will be.
My thoughts anyway. As long as they don't clutter up the list.