Eric Boyd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sodom: thanks for starting the thread... I was just about to do it
> myself.
>
> Tim Rhodes <proftim@speakeasy.org> writes:
> <<
> As do I . As self-replicating structures go, a form of distinct
> hierarchy is an absolute must. What else does the lowly initiate have
> to strive for, if not a velvet seat within the majestic Inner Circle?
> >>
>
> That would be cool alright -- especially the velvet seats! I was
> thinking a "round table" type of thing might be good -- especially one
> with no fixed size, so that whenever another becomes worthy (and how
> do we judge that? and who is we?) the table expands and we create
> another chair.
>
> The only real question is whether such "status" carries any power, in
> terms of how the church is run and how it evolves. Wade says "Such a
> non-egalitarian heirarchy will cause me to flee." But I suspect that
> if it's only the *illusion* of non-egalitarian-ness, he
> object. We can probably get all of the memetic benefits without
> actually giving the inner circle any real power. If we can appeal to
> humankind's need for heirarchy without actually having one... that is
> the best of both worlds.
>
> Sodom <sodom@ma.ultranet.com> writes:
> <<
> I think the idea of a Virian council should be seriously thought out
> for many reasons.
>
> 1> Hierarchical structure will help accomplish some of the tasks that,
> with organization and specific responsibility, the CoV could
> accomplish
> >>
>
> Yes -- we need this.
>
> <<
> 3> This group can help to eliminate problem makers
> >>
>
> Yikes! Better start running now Wade...
>
> Do you seriously think we need to do this?
Actually, this is more about the battle that ensued between Brett and everyone. I certainly don't want to silence ANYONE, but also I think flame wars are not really in anyone's interest. BUT - I would rather have the wars then censor anyone. Or, we could all wear arm bands and chant slogans. (that part is a joke btw)
>
>
> <<
>
> 5> Vote on Saints and other issues
> >>
>
> Do you think it's wise to restrict voting to an 'inner circle'?
No, only if convenient - as we meant for the saint issue.
>
>
> <<
> 6> Provide a "role model" position for newness, or those that are slow
> to grasp some of the basic issues
> >>
>
> We already do this (I hope).
>
> <<
> So then, we need to decide on the amount of people, how they are
> elected, term length, etc...
> >>
>
> Even worse than that is deciding who gets to be in the inner circle...
> I have my own opinions, of course, but they aren't likely to be the
> same as other's opinions, and I certainly don't want to exclude
> potentially valuable people because of some simple minded rule like
> "must have spent min. one year on the list" or "must be liked by
> majority of council members" or whatever 'process' we come up with.
>
> In short, we need a dynamic system... something that can evolve with
> us, and the church. But how does one create such a system?
>
> I was thinking that perhaps the best rule for who is in the inner
> circle is "only those who feel they belong there". Are you worthy?
> Am I?
>
> And a meta-question related to that -- since such subjective feelings
> are probably based deeply in human nature (and our hierarchical
> tendencies... which we inhereted from the apes), there is probably a
> limit on the number of people who would 'feel worthy' at any time,
> i.e. once five or ten or however many people the psychological limit
> is was reached, no further chairs would be created -- instead people
> would enter into a pecking-order for the chairs already present.
>
> We don't want that... but how do you avoid it?
>
> (here I'm thinking specifically of those conferences where born
> leaders all get together... and rather than the chaos one would
> expect, 90% of them lose their dominance and submit to the new pecking
> order... a new heirarchy is formed. If I'm right about Virus and it's
> individual advancement goals, we will face the same type of thing
> eventually... which is lousy for those individuals who are otherwise
> on the top but have to take low positions in Virus because of the
> presence of so many others... how does one create a truly egalitarian
> organization?)
>
> ERiC
Bill Roh