TAY Atmosphere

....any time there is even constructive criticism of TAY ( I'm not not characterizing mine as)or it's moderation ,we are constantly told we should just be grateful, that it's time consuming and thankless etc, etc. Or that it could be closed down because the SOLE owner decides to ( Which He can for whatever reason at present).

Oddly enough, I haven't found this true at all. I've criticized and I've often witnessed others criticizing but heard nothing of the sort...with rare exceptions. Possibly that's why my conclusions are so different from this one, with which I respectfully but wholeheartedly disagree:

Too much power in one place, no matter who it is or benevolent they are.

I can imagine circumstances under which I'd support an expanded, community-based ownership structure (in fact I suggested this possibility to Charles several years ago), but I don't feel at all supportive of the kind of website for which you've stated your desire, regardless of its ownership. This has nothing to do with laziness.

I have to say I've been impressed with the sophistication, wisdom and wide variety of perspectives expressed throughout this thread. If there are others currently holding back, I hope we hear from them as well.

Mark

I can imagine circumstances under which I'd support an expanded, community-based ownership structure (in fact I suggested this possibility to Charles several years ago)

Well since you beat me to it years ago in making this suggestion , why did it not gain any traction?
BTW, I'm not proposing any changes in the format, TOU, masthead, sections, atmosphere, rule enforcement, civilty or anything other than a change of ownership and the resignation of existing moderators and the adoption of a Board ( 4 to 6 members)that would also act as the moderator rotation. I've even said I have no problem if their first action is to ban me.... you still get the $1,500....... Looks like a win/win to me.
Why the reluctance to change it from a Fiefdom to a commune?
Is there a TAY aristocracy or something . Looking more and more like a monarchy to me where the title is passed from one member of the aristocracy to another while the serfs applaud the new King and vie for places ( and the influence )at court based upon their toadying to the King.

Why the reluctance to change it from a Fiefdom to a commune?

Sorry, but I've got no interest in trying to answer a question framed in this manner.

Is there a TAY aristocracy or something . Looking more and more like a monarchy to me where the title is passed from one member of the aristocracy to another while the serfs applaud the new King and vie for places ( and the influence )at court based upon their toadying to the King.

Nor do I care to engage with this particular sort of discourse. Others may be willing.

best,

Mark

Sorry, but I've got no interest in trying to answer a question framed in this manner.

Nor do I care to engage with this particular sort of discourse.  Others may be willing.

best,

Mark

I'm sure they won't.
Best,
Chris

I'm wary of a change that would shift from one person feeling final responsibility for the site to management-by-committee, which in other aspects of life seems to be a recipe for lack of accountability, lots of talk but often far less action, and watered down decisions. And yes, I'd be wary regardless of who suggested the change.

I'm wondering - are you aware of any online forums that operate with the management structure that you're proposing? If so, it would be interesting to see and hear what their experiences have been. In the meantime, the law of unintended consequences makes me wary and reminds me of that old saw, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it..."

It ain't perfect, but it ain't broke. FOTAY sounds like a giant PITA.