woof
 GM, 3 posts
Tue 24 Sep 2002
at 07:20
A forum that's a game
Please note that even though this game appears under the "General Forums" it is still a game, thus people have to request access to be able to post...

My thoughts were that when someone does donate we can add them into the system as a player in group 0, their login ID matching their 'character name'.

This message was last edited by admin at 10:28, Sat 26 Apr 2003.

JohnB
 GM, 5 posts
Tue 24 Sep 2002
at 07:29
Re: A forum that's a game
Yes - that  sounds  good to  me  mate.
elSpike
 GM, 3 posts
Tue 24 Sep 2002
at 07:30
Re: A forum that's a game
Very similar to the Gotcha Debates.
JohnB
 GM, 8 posts
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 10:12
Re: A forum that's a game
Please note -  this is in an admin only forum  :)  and please can we keep this  discussion in and the commenst  made in here for the moment.

I  have joined the 'Save PBW' yahoo group, and and one of the  guys there is  taking about  getting a Non-profit together to think about taking over PBW.

I  think it is Fatman, who has both an account here and at PBW.  If I am right, he probably  has the skills to work with Jim's code -  not immediately, but  he  should have  something workable by the time Jim pulls the plug in June  2003.

That programming was one of the things that was missing from the original bid some of us made for PBW, and certainly makes the PBW future seem more promising.

I am going to  make an offer, as an individual, to  work  with Fatman to  try and sort something out there -  because it  has been a good site to me and I  would  hate to see it  die.

Would you also like me to talk to Fatman as Chairman of FoRPoL  and  see  if  we can tie together links between the two sites again -  perhaps  build  towartds a 'sister sites'  relationship that  Jase talked to  Jim about -  and Jase and I  were talking about when during the original PBW offer.
dollsteak
 GM, 7 posts
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 10:14
Re: A forum that's a game
PBW can burn in hell for all I care.  But do what you want.
Jhael
 GM, 3 posts
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 10:19
Re: A forum that's a game
It depends on what hat he's wearing, I think, dollsteak.

John, my suggestion would be work on it as an individual until you and fatman have a good idea of where its going, then reassess the situation to see if RPOL needs to get involved officio.

I think getting RPOL involved too early will make it look like hostile takeover, and both sites would probably benefit from a much more relaxed and friendly approach. There is enough strain already.

Suck it and see?
JohnB
 GM, 9 posts
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 10:26
Re: A forum that's a game
As Chair of  F-RPoL and being involved in its  setting up and running,  it is fair that I talk to  you all if I think of  doing something that  might be  seen as a 'clash of interests'.  And talking to  PBW  can be seen in those terms.

I  agree with Jhael though.  It  is probably  better for me to act as an individual, rather than trying to represent FoRPoL.  But it is  important for me to  know -  that I  am  not  doing things as an indivdual, that  you think I  should be  doing as Chair of FoRPoL  :)
dollsteak
 GM, 8 posts
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 11:39
Re: A forum that's a game
An interesting note... Jim may have advertised that Yahoo Group.  But looking through it, it seems he hasn't posted to it even once.  I sincerely doubt he's that concerned about the fate of PBW and it will eventually die (in June).
JohnB
 GM, 10 posts
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 14:14
Re: A forum that's a game
Doll -  You may well be right.  However, there is a chance the site  can be rescued and that a whole bunch of players and DMs  won't get let down.  And I  do still have a soft spot  for  PBW, after all it is  where I started my online gaming, and somewhere that I have enjhoyed many hours of  playing in the past few years.

It is, IMO, something thats  worth putting some effort into still.
Shannara
 GM, 9 posts
 Treasurer
 
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 15:36
Re: A forum that's a game
I've also tentatively volunteered to help with the save PBW effort.  However, unless Jim gets off his butt and announces to the group under what circumstances he's willing ot turn it over, I'm not going to do anything more or post again on the site.

I was part of Johnb's prior effort -- but I'm not going to waste time working up anything without knowing that Jim'll follow thru.

My participation there, if any, is on my own behalf.  Like John, I have a bit of a sentimental streak.
Jhael
 GM, 4 posts
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 15:41
Re: A forum that's a game
We do appreciate you two letting us know that's what you're up to. It certainly saves anyone wondering about it if someone finds out accidentally.

Good luck - hopefully the rescue attempt will work out.
bigbadron
 GM, 5 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 17:36
Re: A forum that's a game
Hmmm... like Dollsteak I have a particularly bad opinion of Jim following the events of my last few days at PbW.  I was also part of the offer that was made to Jim just before everything fell to pieces, and was not very impressed with how he handled things from his end of the "negotiations".
Personally I'd rather not have to deal with him again, but if John and Shan want to try and help out the users over there, then I say "go for it and good luck".
It's only the management I have a problem with.
Shannara
 GM, 10 posts
 Treasurer
 
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 19:37
Re: A forum that's a game
Well, Ron -- I share your bad opinion.  I do know that if Jim plans on being involved after the 'non-profit' turnover (if it happens), then I won't be a part of it.

That's what I'm waiting to find out.
dollsteak
 GM, 9 posts
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 21:09
Re: A forum that's a game
After everything that happened, I have absolutely no impulse to support Jim's efforts in maintaining a legacy in his name.  So long as PBW exists, it will have his name attached to it.  He saw to that by giving up the code to the public.

And if I'm supposed to feel sorry for a bunch of clingers, sorry.  I can't.  I moved for desire of greener pastures.  After being here for but a few months, I can't help but feel that anyone still at PBW are fools.  If they had an inkling of a clue, the'd come here without haste.
dollsteak
 GM, 10 posts
Thu 26 Sep 2002
at 21:58
Re: A forum that's a game
I've updated our 'web site' on this game forum, linking it to the web page John's been keeping up.
dollsteak
 GM, 11 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 04:38
Re: A forum that's a game
C-lass has helped me consider something.  I really am confused by Shannara and John's interest in this PBW thing.  It seems downright disloyal to all our efforts here at RPOL to want to divide your attention for some has-been of a site.

Yeah, it was great.  Yeah, we're all thankful that we had a place to start... blah blah blah.  The point is... it's in the past.  You don't go to your old residence and mow the lawn when you got a new house, do you?

You should be concentrating your efforts on RPOL!  Shannara, work's got you so overloaded that you can barely keep your games going.  John, you've cut down on your games just recently because you've been working three part time jobs.  And now you're both considering helping Jim with this lame attempt at carrying his legacy onward.  He isn't even truly interested.  He's just stringing everyone along for the one final day when he decides it's not worth it anymore... then he'll expect everyone else to jump through hoops and make it work magic like overnight.  It won't matter to him then, because he'll be out of the picture.

He hasn't even fixed the new user link, for crying out loud.  Do you really think he's going to bother with all the extra effort of cutting everything over?

Your time and efforts are better spent here, where woof, elSpike, IronSite, and Jhael have welcomed us readily, with open arms, and virtually bent over backwards to make everything work the way we've been asking.  I am quite offended that you would so rudely and openly offer your help to the competition.

But I still love you guyz.
bigbadron
 GM, 6 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 04:47
Re: A forum that's a game
But I still love you guyz.

Group Hug!
elSpike
 GM, 6 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 04:51
Re: A forum that's a game
Refrains...

"this is sooo gay"  [not that there is anything wrong with that]
bigbadron
 GM, 7 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 04:57
Re: A forum that's a game
*scratches head*

What's "gay" about wanting to get into a clinch with Shannara?
elSpike
 GM, 7 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 05:07
Re: A forum that's a game
It was dollsteak's profession of love that started it...
dollsteak
 GM, 13 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 05:10
Re: A forum that's a game
I'm a lover, not a fighter.  You're just jealous because you wanted me all for yourself, elSpike.
elSpike
 GM, 8 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 05:10
Re: A forum that's a game
*sobs* oh no! my secret shame....
dollsteak
 GM, 15 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 05:35
Re: A forum that's a game
"Game Info" has been entered.
JohnB
 GM, 14 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 07:35
Re: A forum that's a game
Doll -  your  analogy isn't  quite right. For years I have played at both PBW and RPoL, and  have never seen any conflict in it, I still have a PBW account and an still in a game over there.  So I  am still a part of the PBW  user community still as  much as I am part of the commmunity here. I  still, also, have friends who play at PBW -  and may be even a few that play only at PBW, same as I have friends who only  play here at RPoL.

So I  don't  see my self  as  having moved house completely -  more like I  still kept a room at the old place so I  can go back for occasional visits, and  have some responsibility  for light chores about the place.  But even in RL - I have been known to mow the lawn  for  friends of  mine who aren't  able to do it  for themselves,I  don't  see this  as  too far  different to that.

You are right though, ATM I  don't  have a lot of time because of the way my  new jobs have worked out, but then PBW isn't taking a lot of time up ATM.  If there starts to be a conflict then I  will need to  reconsider it again.
dollsteak
 GM, 17 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 07:37
Re: A forum that's a game
I see it as a conflict of interest.  Especially for 'chairman'.
dollsteak
 GM, 28 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 09:04
Re: A forum that's a game
There you go, John.  I'm out of the voting issues.  Don't worry about that 'conflict of interest' thing because it doesn't matter to me anymore now that I'm not anything but a secretary and portrait editor.

I've got no interest in being in a position where I get admonished for doing something I thought was appropriate according to the rules laid out before me and the title of the position.  And no matter what you call that position now, it's already done.

I won't continue working in a position where I have to tread softly and get every little detail approved by everyone, especially something so insignificant as a message base.  I am proactive in nature.  So I clearly won't work under those guidelines.
Shannara
 GM, 13 posts
 Treasurer
 
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 11:49
Re: A forum that's a game
I like Ron's 'group hug' idea.

Dollsy, I stated my priorities very clearly in one of the other threads that I read first.  I hope that it alleviates your concerns about where my time will be allocated.  For what it's worth, I doubt that 'save pbw' will ever get off the ground.  I doubt seriously that Jim will ever respond, or if he does, it'll be after everyone else has given up and gone home.  So -- you're most likely right (again).

RPOL is my first priority (online).  It will continue to be so (unless woof's ego suddenly swells to massive proportions and he tries to shut up everyone who doesn't immediately espouse his opinions :P ).
dollsteak
 GM, 33 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 12:56
Country Rep
Whatever you want to call it...

You are limiting the voting of certain issues... however rare... to a small select panel of chosen individuals.  This is nothing short of an 'inner circle'.

The representatives (whatever you want to dub them) are not truly representing anything but their own best interests.

It is not right.  I am sorry I didn't catch it until now, but my understanding of the Country Representative was vastly different from what John intended.  If you want to hold votes for whatever reasons, then the public should be allowed to participate... anyone who comes to RPOL.NET, not just those who donate, not just a select few.

That's my take on things.  Furthermore, if another vote for Chairman were offered to the public, I assure you I would not vote for John knowing he was going to split his attention between two sites.  (Not that we had many choices for Chairman).

Maybe that's why I'm a bit irrate this morning.  I knew Shannara was expressing interests to help... but she's always been soft hearted for a cause, and I knew if it came down to it, she'd choose RPOL over PBW.

I can't say the same thing about John and what he would choose should he start heading some big project reestablishing PBW.  I am not comfortable with our Chairman in that position, and I believe that information should have been made evident before we put him in that position.  It was unfair and dishonest to hide the fact until afterwards.
Jhael
 GM, 9 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 13:12
Re: hmm
may in retrospect be a stupid question but...

how was the initial meeting determined? who was invited? how was it conducted?
dollsteak
 GM, 35 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 13:16
Re: hmm
I'll send you the transcripts if you like.  Just pass me an E-mail addy (You can send it to if you like).

John arranged a good time between Shannara, BBR and myself, we all had Yahoo Messenger, so it was convenient.  I don't know if he invited anyone else.
Jhael
 GM, 10 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 13:26
Re: hmm
laugh - and now you're worried about it being cliquey?

okay it looks like four people have set this up and intend to run with it, that's excellent

it seems to me that there's becoming a distinct need for two groups - a users group, and this admin forum

the users group will require significant and fair representation - this group doesn't - its function is to administrate around solving some of the resourcing issues of the site

I'm mildly puzzled that none of the aussie trio of elspike, woof or ironsite, was at the meeting given their very hands on involvement with rpol
dollsteak
 GM, 36 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 13:41
Re: hmm
Me too.
elSpike
 GM, 13 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 13:56
Re: hmm
Guys this is getting out of hand and I thinkI speak for woof on this:

woof runs this site cause he loves playing rpg's full stop.

John and a few others decided to set up a Friends network to make donations to help run the server or whatever. woof didn't ask for this to happen, a few of the users just did it off their own back so there is no inner circle. forpol has no specific baring or authority on what happens to this site... only woof has.

I think people are looking too deep into this.
Jhael
 GM, 11 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 14:02
Re: hmm
shouldn't you be at the pub on a friday night, sweets? ;)
dollsteak
 GM, 37 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 14:08
Re: hmm
Maybe so, but didn't woof say that should he loose interest, he'll give over to the FoRPoL?  That eventually puts those in this Inner Circle that means so little in a high spot of importance.
dollsteak
 GM, 38 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 14:10
Re: hmm
I also remind you all that FoRPoL was made for three reasons:

"We support RPoL in three  ways ...

  1 We raise funds, through donations, to  help pay the running costs of the RPoL website.  You  don't  have to  donate to play at RPoL, it is a free site - and we  want to  keep it that way.

  2 We  provide supporting services to RPoL.  At the moment,  the image server is hosted on web space that belongs to one of our members.  We also vet and upload the images.

  3 We help with other things that RPoL needs.  We  have been involved in writing FAQs, designing and testing.  Later,  we  will look at finding other volunteers to help with RPoL projects. "

Collecting money is one-third of our function.
JohnB
 GM, 21 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 19:28
Re: hmm
Collecting  money is our  primary  function, certainly at the monment.

However - this is  really  getting out of  hand.  FoRPoL in the  sense discussed here is at the moment Me, BBR, Doll and Shan  ...  simple as that :)
Shannara
 GM, 16 posts
 Treasurer
 
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 20:45
Two Different Things
1) There's Friends of RPOL (something that was legally necessary for us to open accounts to collect donations/funds)

2) There's Friends of RPOL (this board) - people who love this site and want to help, whether by suggestions, donations of time and skills, donation of funds, or all of these.


-- 1) This organization is responsible for governing the way that we collect/hold/distribute funds.  All this has made me think a bit more.  I want a secondary 'rep' on these accounts.  The paypal account that currently has funds intended for this site is linked to one of my personal credit cards.  The bank account Friends of RPOL (US Bank) is linked to my tax id number.  NOW -- with that being said, it WILL be someone I trust, personally, who is named the secondary.  Right now, if I was hit by a bus today, the funds would be lost.  I don't like that one little bit.  I'll type up some info directing that should something happen to me, the funds in these accounts should be immediately transferred to either woof or johnb's account.  (Guys, if you would give me some information as to how I can send the funds to you in the event of my death or incapacitation AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, I would appreciate it.)

     NOW ... as long as these accounts are linked to me personally, no matter who decides what, ONLY someone I trust personally is going to be acceptable to me to have access to my credit card info and/or any banking info that I hold.  Off the top of my head, there's a select few here that I would trust to be that secondary -- dollsteak being one, and possibly a couple of others.  (No offense meant to anyone else, but I don't know alot of those here except thru this board.)  Does that make it an 'inner circle' (how I hate that *@#$&% stupid term)?  I don't care.

In other words, the whole darn site could vote to have Dag made a US rep/salesman/collector/whatever, and he still wouldn't get access to any account that is linked to me.  Same goes for the other 3 at the meeting.  They could vote him in, and I STILL wouldn't accept it.  (I would simply transfer the funds I held over to woof or another RPOL collection point and walk away.)

2) This group of people who want to help out however we can holds no special status.  If any of them have concerns about how I'm collecting the money or reporting it to woof and the others who are GM's on this board, I'm more than happy to let them have their say in whatever issue they have an opinion.  However, the help that they give is totally up to woof and his designated representatives.  There is no special status to being a 'Friend of RPOL' -- except that, to me, I'm extremely happy to know that others like this site and want to say thanks by helping out.  Is that an 'inner circle'?  Well, it does represent a bunch of people that I'm proud to play with.

RPOL is woof's site.  Woof has accepted help from others, whether in editing/monitoring/picture editing, whatever.

Whether any of that makes sense or not, my general conclusion is that those who say that we're looking too deep into this are absolutely right.

Woof, you can count on me to help this site however I can, so long as it continues to be run in the same wonderfully friendly fashion.  You can count on me to report donations sent to the accounts that I have established, to hold them in said accounts until required, and to pass them along in a timely manner.

If ANY of you have any doubts about that, I'll be happy to pass along the funds currently there, close the accounts, and go back to my games.  That goes for the members of 'FRPOL' as designated for the bank account John opened, or any of the GM's on this site.

And if you're willing to trust me with the responsibility of doing that, and the donating members are willing to trust me, I'll be happy to keep doing it.  In that event, dollsteak, gimme a yell and I'll give you the account names/password AND a check to use to clear out the funds in the checking account in the event of my death/incapacitation.  If you don't want to be the secondary, I'll consider other alternatives.

Dang, by the time I got finished reading all this stuff, I was so confused I don't even know how this argument/dust up got started or why.  But please ... don't try to explain it to me.  I have a headache already.
Shannara
 GM, 17 posts
 Treasurer
 
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 20:54
Re: Two Different Things
Sorry for the length of the above.

One more thing - should woof lose interest/die/be incapacitated, then dollsteak is right.  If he chooses to pass RPOL along to Friends of RPOL, this group would have more significance than it does now.

I hope that never happens.  If it does, then I suggest that those who are still helping in the event of any of these tragedies simply act in the best interest of keeping this site opened and heading in the same direction.

Myself, I trust each of the GM's of this 'game/forum' to do just that.  All elections and politicking and thinking up rules to cover any/every eventuality does, IMnsHO, is create work for lawyers.
dollsteak
 GM, 41 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 21:47
Re: Two Different Things
Shannara, thanks for the trust, but my 'boss' will not allow me to put my name on anything official with respect to this 'hobby' of mine.  As I trust her with all of my financial affairs, I will not second-guess her with this decision.  I made this point abundantly clear on numerous occasions, inside the meeting and out.  Therefore, to associate me with any position that has been designated for financial purposes is not logical in any sense of the word.

When John approached me with this Friends of RolePlay On-Line idea, it was to create an element that would possibly, eventually, help this web-site run itself.  It was to be for the community, not for a group of four people.  I am not comfortable being a part of some small group of essential people because that forms an inner circle.  And anyone who is to be added to the official positions need to be voted in by the current members.

There is only one position that should be essential, and that's the treasurer.  That person is entrusted with all the money that filters through to the proper hosts.  No small group of people should be allowed to voice the trust of the community.  Sorry.  I'm sure there probably isn't one person who'd speak against Shannara, but they should still have had the opportunity.  Far as I care, the rest of the positions are just luxury.

By leaving the vote of a conflict of interest for the chairman position to group 8, you have justified my feelings that this whole setup is based on what a small group of people feel, not a community to help sustain itself.  It is not what it was proposed to me initially.
Shannara
 GM, 18 posts
 Treasurer
 
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 22:05
Re: Two Different Things
You're missing the point.  My name would still be on it -- you would only have access to the information, and could initiate the transfer for me in the event of my death.  That's all.  But that's neither here nor there - you don't want to do it, that's okay with me.  I'll figure out a way to make sure that someone has access to these funds as a backup for me and that the donations given to FRPOL will go to RPOL.

Dollsy, tell you what.  I can't speak for anyone else, but feel free to open up the public floor for the position of Treasurer.  Anyone else wants to volunteer to do it, or if anyone thinks I shouldn't, I'll be happy find something else to do with my time.  I'm not campaigning, I'm not interested in proving myself or my credentials to the general public.  I volunteered to do it - simple as that, because I get a lot of enjoyment out of the games I play here.  It's not going to hurt my feelings in the least to have someone else do it.
bigbadron
 GM, 9 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 22:08
Re: Two Different Things
Well, if people are going to pick pick pick at everything that gets said, we may as well forget the whole thing.
I was under the impression that the point of this was for a group of FRIENDS to try and raise money to ensure the survival of something they all enjoyed, not to score political points off each other.
What started out as a good idea is degenerating into petty bickering about semantics in less than a week.  Maybe it was a bit optimistic planning another meeting in three months.
Up until today I had a good feeling about this, now I'm just getting pissed off with it.
dollsteak
 GM, 42 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 22:28
Re: Two Different Things
Thats the whole point, Ron.  A group of Friends is what it's been limited to.  When I was presented with the idea, it was to be a community of Friends, not just a select few.

Really, keep it however you want. I'm simply not comfortable with it the way it is set up and I'm opting out.  There is nothing wrong with me doing that.  The only conflict I saw was that the Secretary (and all official positions) was supposed to be held by Country Representatives.  Since I don't want to be a Country Representative, then I should be asked to step down from Secretary.

That's your call.  I'm willing to remain secretary.  But I will not segregate myself and elevate myself above the rest of those who come here.
JohnB
 GM, 23 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 22:40
Re: Two Different Things
I agree  Ron ...  I am beginning to  wonder  what I signed up for.

And I  am also like  Shan -  I  am more than happy  to stand down and let  someone  else  chair this whole set up.  I am not  here to be a control freak -  BUT if its my  credit card and financial reputation thats  holding the UK side together -  I need some element of control, atb least of the that  side of the operation.

I  MAY  be  prepared to  run the UK accounts  with someone else running F-RPoL  -  BUT  that  depend on the financial regulations they  bring in.  However, I am more than happy to hand over control of the UK account to  anoyone  who is  prepared to manage it.  However, I am still chair, I will expect the account to be run proprly, and will resign if  it  doesn't appear to be.

Its as simple as that.
dollsteak
 GM, 43 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 22:55
Re: Two Different Things
Hey yo... what is this... I start a chain reaction?  I'm the only one who has spoke out against the current configuration and ideals of the group.  If the rest of you are thinking about ducking out, then that's just because I'm ducking out.

If you want to quit, you'd better have a better reason than dollsteak envy.

You can run this thing just fine without me acting as some sort of boardmember.  No matter what position I'm in, I'm still going to be full of opinion.
JohnB
 GM, 24 posts
Fri 27 Sep 2002
at 23:16
Re: Two Different Things
Doll - I  am reacting generally and  stating my position.  That's  all.  I am  more than happy  to  keep  my  roles in the fund raising side -  BUT  I  won't  keep doing it if its  not what people  want  done,  I am more than happy  to stand aside and let you, or anyone else, organise a different set up.

However, Friends of RPoL is  something completely differnet  from  what  we were sufggesting as replacement management  for PBW.  That  was a case of  taking ove rthe site and  making it a place run by the community  for the community.  Under those conditions, I am more than happy  to accept a fully  democratic organisation,  and will be  one of the ones that pushes hard for it.

Here, though, we are restricted to a role of  supporting Woof and his site, and that is  fine by me.  However, that  does make it a whole different ball game, and  means that  we  have to  chnage the  modus operandi, to  something that works in that suport role.
dollsteak
 GM, 44 posts
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 03:52
Re: Two Different Things
If the FoRPoL is only about making money as you continue to claim, then we don't need anyone but the Treasurer and those who have some other form of payment procedure for their country as accountants.

There doesn't need to be Country Representatives.

There doesn't need to be a Secretary.

There doesn't need to be meetings with votes.

And there doesn't need to be a Chairman.

The portrait editing function needs to be disassociated from this group because I am not a "Country Representative", or you need to assign someone who is to the main Portrait Editor position.

Any decision that needs to be made should be available for the FoRPoL community.  By making those decisions for them without representing them is precisely why America went to war against England over 200 years ago.  What if one or more of the others on RPOL have something against the Treasurer we voted in?  (No offense to Shannara.  I can't see anyone saying anything bad about you, but it still should have been a public decision).  And what about her replacement?  Sure it should be someone Shannara can trust... but what about the trust of everyone sending their money in?  Doesn't that matter?

I'm through talking about it.  It's not what you proposed to me.  I resigned from that responsibility.  If you are uncomfortable with the way I perceive it, then change it.  Otherwise, don't worry about it.  Either way, I'm out of the line-up so I don't have an 'official say'.

That is my Humble Opinion.
bigbadron
 GM, 10 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 04:31
Re: Two Different Things
Look at it this way.  There are 4 members of FoRPoL.  That's it.  Just 4.

Everybody else is an associate.  Later on others may become members.

The whole title of Country Rep is misleading.  We don't represent anything other than  the fact that there is a FoRPoL bank account set up in a particular country.
We can argue about the precise meanings of words until we wear our fingers down to the bone.  If you don't want to be called a Country Rep, then that's up to you.  It doesn't change the fact that you are a MEMBER as opposed to an associate.
The only reason the titles exist is to define who is a member, and is thus responsible for keeping an eye on a particular country's bank account.
My advice Doll, stop worrying about it and concentrate on why the thing has been set up.
In fact, John change the title to Member(Country) or something.  Maybe then we can stop all the arguing and get on with what we're supposed to be doing.
Quite frankly, if I was Woof now, I'd be saying "Strewth! What a bunch of wankers.  Do I really want their support?  They can't even agree on the meaning of a word!"
dollsteak
 GM, 45 posts
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 05:29
Re: Two Different Things
Man, doesn't anyone read what I'm saying?

I cannot do anything with funds... period.  Why am I included again?
bigbadron
 GM, 11 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 06:36
Re: Two Different Things
Yes, I got that, but you are the one who seems to be stressed about the wording of the phrase Country Representative.
That's what I said; stop worrying about stuff like that.  It doesn't matter.  We'll get somebody else to back-up Shan, you carry on with the portrait function, and if you want to quit as secretary then I'll stand for it.  Nobody has to be involved any more than they want to, it's purely voluntary.
It's that simple...
dollsteak
 GM, 46 posts
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 06:43
Re: Two Different Things
It's not voluntary, it's inducted.  If it were voluntary, then some of those volunteers in that other messagebase would be offered a position within this special group of close-knit friends.  If it were that open to the public, then John's conflict of interest vote would be offered to everyone, not just group 8.

I'm sorry that I'm making such a big deal about it... but I simply don't want to be a part of what it will become, an inner circle.  I never liked good-ole-boy networks.  It wasn't my game.

Like I said, I can continue as Secretary if you want my services, but wording on the web site and those regulations got to change.  I am not to be associated with an inner circle... period.
bigbadron
 GM, 12 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 07:22
Re: Two Different Things
Okay, do what you like.  You've soured the whole idea for me anyway...

And if you want to keep saying "Inner Circle", that's fine with me too SmilingDoll.

This message was last edited by the GM at 07:22, Sat 28 Sept 2002.

dollsteak
 GM, 47 posts
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 07:26
Re: Two Different Things
I don't see what else it could be without being restructured.  Call me names if you want.  Doesn't change the facts.

Don't see how I've soured things.  Everything remains the same... just without me associated.  Or am I getting you to thinking?

This message was last edited by the GM at 07:26, Sat 28 Sept 2002.

dollsteak
 GM, 48 posts
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 07:29
Re: Two Different Things
Here ya go.  I'll fix things and make them right for you, so you can go on your merry way and not have any of this nonsense spoken in group 8.  Really very simple to fix.
bigbadron
 GM, 13 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 07:32
Re: Two Different Things
Not at all.  It was intended to be FRIENDS of RPoL, all this griping from the only person who seems to have a problem with the way John has it organised has made it less friendly.

May as well change the name to RPoL Finance Corporation and hire a slew of accountants and lawyers to run it.
Shannara
 GM, 19 posts
 Treasurer
 
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 14:14
Re: Two Different Things
I'm tempted to add dollsteak to group 8 just to be contrary :P

However, he's got just player access now, as he wanted.

Woof, I really would appreciate knowing how to get the funds to you that I've collected.  We don't have to do any transfers now, but the people that donated them wanted you to have them for site maintenance costs, and I want to make sure I have a safety in place so that the funds will get to you should something happen to me.

Since dollsteak is morally opposed to the idea, I propose that I make Arkwell my backup.  I've known him for a number of years, and he's offered to help before.
JohnB
 GM, 25 posts
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 14:17
Re: Two Different Things
Shan -  sorry to  say this  but iunder the regulations  we  have to  have a meeting to   accept him -  BUT  we can call that  as soon as  we  get  a positive response  from Jaime  :)
Shannara
 GM, 20 posts
 Treasurer
 
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 14:22
Okie Dokie
No biggie.  However, it's easier to bring up my thoughts here than to note everyone concerned or email them :P
bigbadron
 GM, 15 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 15:15
Re: Okie Dokie
And I can step in as secretary if that's okay, pending confirmation from the others.  Whoopee!  I get to be sexually harrassed by Shan!  Yes!  All my dreams are coming true!  Ahem, I mean... "Secretary is a dirty job but somebody has to do it."

I hate to say this, but I'm starting to see why Jim wanted nothing to do with Dollsteak.  He's taken a great idea and made it seem like some sort of scam run by a group of con-men (and a con-woman)...
Jhael
 GM, 12 posts
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 17:41
Re: Okie Dokie
To be honest I think Doll's just made a little misunderstanding, as did I.

I assumed the FRPPOL thing was a whole group of us, not just the four who decided to go ahead with the meeting. Those of us who were on the original emails may have believed that we were going to be included in that.

Now that its been made clear that's not the case, those of us who were confused can get on with letting you guys do it.

Although you may want to consider adjusting the GM status of this group to those who are actually involved, rather than the rest of us as well, seeing as you won't have anywhere more 'private' to discuss.

I do think that whether or not it was your intention, you have created the impression of a clique. I'm not sure whether you want to address that, or leave it as it is.
JohnB
 GM, 27 posts
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 18:01
Re: Okie Dokie
Jhael - Jase created this board and is the final arbiter of  who has  GM status on it.  And if  you remember  -  all the Aussies  decided it  was easier for them to mail Jase directly  with funds -   so  at the moment  we have just  set up a group  to  collect  funds in the UK and the US.  Based on the feedback from the overall group -  even though it was ages ago.

There is  no  reason  why  more people can't be added -  and it  was always intended that  more  peope  would be added -  the  rules  and regs  make that very clear in the way they are written.
Shannara
 GM, 22 posts
 Treasurer
 
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 18:04
Re: Okie Dokie
The FRPOL status that required officers was for one purpose - allowing johnb to open up an account in the UK.  Therefore, dollsy conveniently ignored why the other postitions other than treasurer were set up.  The witch-hunt that he wanted because Johnb and I have made tentative steps toward volunteering at the save pbw group didn't materialize as rapidly as he wanted, so we're now pariah and anything that we touch is, of course, suspect.

Ya know ... more and more, this looks like a bad idea.  Wanting to help has suddenly turned into more aggravation than it's worth.

So - here's my idea/proposal, and feel free to call a meeting on it or whatever.

Either everyone involved in this (and I don't give an (expletive deleted)WHO that includes, gets together and figures out whether woof & etc. want help and how we can do it, or we fold right now.

I've got donations that I'd be happy to return to those who have made them, or forward to woof - whichever.

Sorry, Ron.  Sorry, Johnb.  You want to go ahead with this, then I'll be happy to transfer the accounts over Jaime if he wants it, or anyone else you select.  But it ain't worth it - not to me.  Not like this.

This message was last edited by the GM at 18:04, Sat 28 Sept 2002.

JohnB
 GM, 28 posts
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 18:12
Re: Okie Dokie
To  be honest -  I  feel a bit like that  ATM  as well.

BUT  I  don't  see anyone  else coming along volunteering to  run it, nor  coming up  with any plans.  All I  see is  Dollsteak upset  cos things  didn't  go  his  way.

However -  if anyone  wants  to  invent a democratic  system - or  any other system that  Woof  approves of - I  will gladly  hand  what  ever  we have got over to you.

However - if  you decide you  want Shan, Ron and me to  do it - then I  will carry on as we are - and expand the active group slowly, as we always intended.
bigbadron
 GM, 16 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Sat 28 Sep 2002
at 18:44
Re: Okie Dokie
Let's leave things as they are for now.  The way we have things set up now is no different from the way most companies are set up.  The board of directors decide who is on the board of directors, with the employees having little or no say in the matter.
It can't be that unconstitutional, otherwise capitalism would be illegal in most countries.

We four (now three) took the initiative on this, and I say we need to give it a chance.  It's been less than a week, and it's too soon to make a big decision about whether we should carry on.  Let's at least give it until the next meeting, and see how it goes.
The only person so far who has a problem with it is Dollsteak, other people are happy to volunteer and send money WITHOUT questioning the set-up.
We owe it to Woof, and to everybody else, to give this our best shot.
Jhael
 GM, 13 posts
Sun 29 Sep 2002
at 09:50
Re: Okie Dokie
I agree, I think since you guys have set it up like this, you should run with it. Now that its very clear that's what the setup is, I can't see that there'll be any more problems.

I think the confusion arose from the difference in the original scope (ie the emails that were flying around a while back) and the final result.

You guys have put the effort into it, drawn up the scope, now go with it. If you pull out the moment it starts looking hard well... we're all doomed, eh? ;)

And my comment about the board is still pretty relevant - woof has set it up so that the people who were in the original email threads have the status, not the people who ended up forming the group. Its not the same thing.
woof
 GM, 8 posts
Sun 29 Sep 2002
at 09:53
Re: Okie Dokie
I'm not sure where we're going to host the site yet Shannara, and I had envisioned the transaction being direct to/from my hosting company.  My preference is to keep it here, but the cost might be a problem.  It isn't a dedicated server, but it's pretty bloody close.

And for help... PLEASE!  Indeed I do want help and appreciate all the efforts you are going to!

You all have my full support until it's demonstrated I should think otherwise.

As for the FoRPoL group, I guess I have a diffent view of things and there's four tiers;

Financial members:  Members who handle the donations
  - eg John, Shan, BBR.

Members:  Other FoRPoL members whos participation varies
  - eg me (I guess), Jhael, IronSite, elSpike (all the other GM's)

Associate:  I guess... people who help out in some way
  - KabinTheDwarf with his PbW to RPoL conversion FAQ (I guess?)

Non-active member:  All other pleb users
  - What was that about a clique group...?

My view was that both members groups would see all the same stuff and have access to all the same messages etc, however the financial members would need to have more active rolls in the accounting side of things.  Any of us other 'members' should be active or inactive on that side (including attending the meetings) as they desire.
JohnB
 GM, 33 posts
Sun 29 Sep 2002
at 11:16
Re: Okie Dokie
Jase - thats  sounds like a really  good  descrition  of  what  we  actually  have.

Why  dont  we  work on  codifying it a little more and set it  as a formal  structure  for FoRPoL  over all.

We  could  change the name of the fund raising group to  Forpol-(Donations) and  make it an off shoot of the general FoRPoL structure.

We  could  change the rules of  FoRPoL(Donations)  so that  we  can only  add memebers of the Members  group to the committee   (although I  still want to  have final say  resting  with the committee at the time to  protect their financial reputations/credit cards  etc  ....)

Members can only  be added BY Jase -  as he  controls  who can GM the FoRPoL forum.  That  means that Jase  has a say on  who  can become a member of the Donations group.

Associate  Members and Inactive Members  are defined  as in Jase's  perviuos post.  Although  maybe  when  someone  has  been  associate for a while  we  should consider making them a full member?  Because  we  need to  keep some new blood coming in and  keeping us on our toes  :)


That  would add an extra layer of  accountability  for the finance  people, and  would  go  some way to  meeting DollSteaks  interest in broader involvement -   but  still let the Donations group protect their own financial interests?
Shannara
 GM, 27 posts
 Treasurer
 
Sun 29 Sep 2002
at 13:40
Re: Okie Dokie
I'm still here and still willing to do whatever I can to help.

John, you know that I couldn't care less about how it's set up.  The only thing that matters to me is that my credit card information and bank information isn't given to someone that I have no idea about who they are.  I do want someone to have access to the paypal account, and I would also like to give that person a signed check made out to Friends of RPOL to be used to transfer funds from the bank account that I opened (which thus far only has my $25.00 in it :P ) to another account in the event that I can't.

I'm a somewhat cautious person, and I would really prefer that the info be given to someone I've known and talked to, even if just thru the internet.  Dollsteak would have been the ideal choice, in my mind, and still would be.  But ... *shrug*

Woof, thanks for speaking up.

I'm sorry about the reactions - dollsteak hurt my feelings quite a bit.
bigbadron
 GM, 20 posts
 He's big, he's bad, but
 most of all, he's Ron...
Sun 29 Sep 2002
at 15:14
Re: Okie Dokie
I'm still up for it too.  Er... I was going to say something clever and erudite about it, but I don't have time just at the minute.  ;o)
Jhael
 GM, 14 posts
Sun 29 Sep 2002
at 16:14
Re: Okie Dokie
Excellent - I'm glad to see you guys not put out.

Shan - don't worry about doll - no one likes being told when they've done something not quite right, and I think a lot of his fuss-making is just cause he took offense at JB asking him to consult.

So for funds

UK people can give to JB
US people can give to Shan
Aust people can send directly to woof

is that how we're doing it?
JohnB
 GM, 37 posts
Sun 29 Sep 2002
at 16:32
Re: Okie Dokie
Almost  Jhael  :)

Shan deals  with international credit card donations and cheques (checks) in US  funds.

I am setting up an account that can handle  donations by cheque in UK  funds.

We  haven't codified a formal way of  collecting funds directly from the Australian contingent, although I expect those  who know Jase  can  slip him a few dollars and a beer  :P    However, Jase  was talking about the money  going straight  from the FoRPoL  account  directly to the supplier and by-passing him.  So that  might not  be acceptable (to Jase) in the long term

However, we  might need to  look at a more  formal  situation if there are people in Brisbane  (for example)  who  want to  contribute by cheque.  The same  applies  for  people in other  currency areas  as well.    At the  moment  we  can only  take other currencies  via  Paypal, which needs to be backed by a credit card.
JohnB
 GM, 38 posts
Sun 29 Sep 2002
at 16:38
Re: Okie Dokie
as an  adendum -  its  going to  be a slow  process codifying  how  we can collect  money in other places.  As these  discussions  have  shown  very  clearly, we need to  have a process that is transparent  and  people can see their  money passing through.

The  system  we  have  ATM  meets UK and US  requirments -  and  will possibly  have to  be modified to  meet  banking requirements in other coutries, as we add them.  Any of those  changes  also  have to  meet US and UK  legal  requirements,  so that we are operating legally in  all of  the countries  ...

It is going to be a bit of a head-ache -  but  won't  be insurmountable.
Jhael
 GM, 16 posts
Mon 30 Sep 2002
at 08:13
Re: Okie Dokie
Groovy stuff, I guess I'm just ultraflexible since I have an australian and a uk bank account.

Although the Inland Revenue doesn't know about the australian one yet.

BTW - did you know that its bloody hard to be domiciled in the UK and I have to basically buy a cemetary plot and then go and die in it first?

This is what I get for learning about taxation law.
woof
 GM, 9 posts
Tue 1 Oct 2002
at 02:37
Re: Okie Dokie
Money being handed directly to me is fine, even if I just go and spend it on beer, `cos at the end of the day I've got to front up the cash for any shortcomings.  If I spend Spike's $40 on beer then I've just got to pay an extra $40 to the hosting provider at some stage!  (c:

Unfortunately though I think doll may have had a good point or two to make, personal feelings do get in the way, and they're unavoidable as much as we may say or wish it to the contrare... after all we're humans talking (typing) to humans.  Harping on the same old points doesn't help either, especially once they've been dismissed or resolved...

There's no Australian paypal site unfortunately, so I'm not sure what we can do about Oz donations except zip them over to the US and back again.

Sounds quite inconvenient Jhael...
elSpike
 GM, 18 posts
Tue 1 Oct 2002
at 03:13
Re: Okie Dokie
woof...

perhaps you set up an account under your name at an aussie bank and put the account number up - that way people can put money in that way?

Im guessing that most people would be happy to do that.
Jhael
 GM, 17 posts
Tue 1 Oct 2002
at 07:22
Re: Okie Dokie
Just watch the tax - if its in your name, it will be considered income in addition to what you earn.

I suspect that's the big problem that John and Shan face.

I'm considering letting you guys have my australian account, seeing as my annual income there is under $6k. But I'd need to think through the legality of that and it would mean relying on me.

<gasp!>
JohnB
 GM, 40 posts
Tue 1 Oct 2002
at 07:36
Re: Okie Dokie
One  way to  do that  would be to open a bank account in the  FoRPol name  and include it in the finacial  set up  we have at the  monmet.

That would  mean that  we  can  amalgamate the funds in Aus -  before  paying the  Aus  supplier ...

Australians  can  send cheques  straight to the  account  and  then  we  can top up  with  what  we  have in the central funds, hopefully reducing money handling costs on the way past.

It  seems to  me that  dollsteak  has  one  real point to  make about the financial  sysem.  -  you  can't  trust the people running it.  He  has  managed to  think up  every  bad scenario  he can -  and tried to  suggest those  scenarios  can only  happen  because the  financial  setup isn't  democratic.  Well that's  Bull -  it  will happen under any  system  IF  the people running it are bent.

I  am well aware  of  the risk in handling other people's money -  both Shan and I  are -   and that's  why  we are  building  reporting systems  that  show  money in  and money  out.  People  will be  able  to track every  single donation.

The  tax issue is not a problem  for me -  the account isn't  in my  name -  I  just  underwrite it.  IE  if  it isn't  operated  properly - I am liable -  so I  need to  ensure the  sytem is  run properly under UK  law -  and why I  won't  give  control of the account to  anyone i  don't  trust.


So  what are  the good points  Doll is  making -  I  can't  see them under the personal slurs that  seem to keep appearing.
Jhael
 GM, 19 posts
Tue 1 Oct 2002
at 07:44
Re: Okie Dokie
Yes I think he's gotten a bit carried away.

To be honest, his experience with PBW seems to have soured him to the point that he can't see any other scenarios. Sad, but understandable.

Accountability is an issue, both you and he are on the right track there.

JB - I trust you with my money, my possessions and my life, so there's no drama there. I think the biggest problem that we may face is simple burnout. And it seems that there are enough people volunteering to fill any gaps that might arise.

Yes I know he's going overboard with it, and I would be offended too if it was my name he was using, but I've already had that pleasure with him dragging me through the mud elsewhere. Put it down to youth and inexperience in debating. But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Find the arguments, close the loopholes and we'll all be much happier. But I think he's going to need a short sharp slapdown if he keeps up with this personal shit.
elSpike
 GM, 20 posts
Thu 5 Dec 2002
at 01:19
Re: Okie Dokie
Hey, has an australian bank account been set up yet?

I think it was GreatHairy that is a banker in Perth.
JohnB
 GM, 48 posts
Thu 5 Dec 2002
at 15:34
Re: Okie Dokie
Not yet -   need a board meeting -  which is  due  soon,  before  we can go ahead with it  :)

and it was Lou  :)
  I have all her details  :)
elSpike
 GM, 21 posts
Thu 5 Dec 2002
at 23:40
Re: Okie Dokie
Thanks J - just thinking of the donate something every month thing.  Might as well lead the charge.
JohnB
 GM, 49 posts
Thu 5 Dec 2002
at 23:44
Re: Okie Dokie
No Sweat -  we have been leaving things a bit  because of personal issues -  but we  will get there  shortly.