Hubby-Wifey Staff Tag-Teams

[drstevej]

How about this reform...

No husband and wife teams on staff if either are senior staffers.

[Texas Lynn]

Agreed. No nepotism period.

[pdudgeon]

I understand where you're comming from, but that's a difficult one to muddle through.
you would also have to deal with families on CF, brothers and sisters on CF, significant others on CF, not-in-a-relationship-but-living-in-the-same-household on CF, etc.

(now if your cat or dog were also on staff at CF then i would draw the line..:razz: )

[anna mouse]

what are the staff relationships and how is there a conflict? Name names.

[BelindaP]

I think he's referring to D'Ann and and Newman99. I don't see where their relationship causes a problem, though.

[jenda]

Well, there is Mr. & Mrs. NewMan99 and Mr. & Mrs. I'ddie4Him

It is really hard to have a decent discussion when there are negative things that need to be said about one of them and the other just keeps jumping in and making defensive remarks that have nothing to do with the discussion. (Not negative in the sense of not liking them, or calling them doodyheads, but negative in the sense of not agreeing with their interpretation (or institution) of policy.

[drstevej]

Add Constance and Mr. Constance to the list.

[Polycarp]

Hmmm.... with all diffidence, may I point out a slight inconsistency in suggesting this on a board where both Seebs and Gomichan are active and as close as we come to staff, and one is domain-holder? Husband-and-wife ministries can be outstandingly effective -- or can be devastatingly destructive to those who come in conflict with either party. If Erwin tossed me the Keys to the Kingdom on this, I'd say: On CF, one of a couple may not be in a position where he/she directly supervises or reviews the other, nor where he/she must collaborate on a team with the other or the other's supervisor/reviewer


By the way, as an example outside CF/christian websites generally of a couple doing effective moderation, I refer you to the Straight Dope Message Board. The Dope, ostensibly based on the Cecil Adams weekly column of that name in alternative newspapers, has a very "flat" staff: Ed Zotti provides the interface with the newspaper which owns and operates the board, five Admins. handle bans and suspensions, reviews of staff actions, etc., and about 15 Moderators (including sevral Admins.) cover individual forums. Cajun Man moderates one forum, MPSIMS, and Dr. Matrix just stepped down after two years moderating General Questions; though not legally recognized as such by their state, they have been a committed couple for 20 years, and have never let their relationship enter into any board decisions. (I only happen to know because I'm on their Christmas card list.)

[drstevej]

How about this reform...

No husband and wife teams on staff if either are senior staffers.

Please note red letter qualifier.

[anna mouse]

why'd you point out that qualifier? All three couples have at least one sr. staffer.

[drstevej]

My objections are minor if the couple are not senior staff. Fewer conflicts of interest,

[pdudgeon]

agreed. it's not the positions but how they are used or abused that would cause a problem.

and if you limited the promotion of an otherwise qualified staff member based on their marital relationship (where have we heard this before?) then you would have a ton of members down your neck.

instead why not look at it from a positive perspective. suggest building in some checks and balances into the system, so that we would not be pitting one marital partner against the other as to who is to be promoted and who must decline a promotion. Career tracks might be a possibility here that could work.

[anna mouse]

that's a good idea.

There are some teams that don't have much to do with each other. What would be the harm in having someone an admin on...ministry and the other a supervisor on debate? Or one in omega?

The question is would you rather have 2 productive people or none?

A lot of couples spend time sitting on the couch typing on their laptops. I wouldn't want a rule to cause a couple to spend less time together.

[gomichan]

Hmmm.... with all diffidence, may I point out a slight inconsistency in suggesting this on a board where both Seebs and Gomichan are active and as close as we come to staff, and one is domain-holder?

Just an aside: I'm not staff. I had the cookie for a while so I could read the mod-side help files and whatnot, but I never did any moderating, and I gave the cookie back.

Which isn't to say I have no effect on Seebs, but I don't think he weighs my opinions any more heavily than any other thoughtful involved party, such as CaDan, Stumpjumper, yourself... long list goes here. While I'll happily tell him what I think, I ain't staff.

As to the OP, I don't think outlawing spousal teams would solve the problem at all. There are people whose nature it is to blindly back up their tribe against all comers, and that 'us against the world' mentality isn't limited to spouses.

[JeffreyLloyd]

How about this reform...

No husband and wife teams on staff if either are senior staffers.

Why?

[drstevej]

Why?

Confidentiality (shared computer)
Conflict of Interests (http://www.christianforums.com/t5378096-public-appeal-d-ann-arbitrary-unjustified-deletion.html)

[JeffreyLloyd]

But what is the problem? There is no conflict as Pastor George said:

I am doing so because the person you are appealing is an administrator and as such this must be heard by Alpha and normally since you are all Catholic it would be looked at by the Catholic Affairs Director. Unfortunately he is the husband of D'Ann and it would be inappropriate for him to do so and he has recused himself from the matter.

[drstevej]

But what is the problem? There is no conflict as Pastor George said:

D'Ann tramples on protocol and P_G blows it off. Do you really expect P_G to go against his Alpha-mate?

[JeffreyLloyd]

D'Ann tramples on protocol and P_G blows it off. Do you really expect P_G to go against his Alpha-mate?

"Trampling protocol" is a bit of an overreaction.

And I expect Pastor George to do what is right. It seems like you didn't like the outcome, so you've made a baseless point (this thread) as if it's really a problem that needs addressed, when in reality it's your odd obsession with OBOB shinning through.

[seebs]

I know nothing about the details of the case. I do think there's an underlying problem, in that the circumstances necessarily impose a bias. Can P_G overcome it? Quite possibly, yes, but I'd rather he didn't have to.

[Crazy Liz]

How senior is senior?

I've seen 3 couples mentioned here. I've seen situations involving all 3 of them where one spouse came to the defense of the other in a "How dare you think anything bad about my spouse?" sort of way. The other H&W staff team I can remember was the Burgers. I don't recall anything like that from either of them, but IIRC they were both Supervisors. They're also both off staff now.

[anna mouse]

What if they don't share a computer?

How is the pillowtalk between an admin/mod couple any different than the pillowtalk of an alpha/non-staff member couple?

What about a staff/conciliator couple?

[jenda]

"Trampling protocol" is a bit of an overreaction.

And I expect Pastor George to do what is right. It seems like you didn't like the outcome, so you've made a baseless point (this thread) as if it's really a problem that needs addressed, when in reality it's your odd obsession with OBOB shinning through.

It has been my observation since the time I was an admin that D'Ann couldn't sit by and let discussions proceed when the discussion centered around a policy or decision Bob was instrumental in without vilifying everyone who disagreed, which led to even higher feelings on both sides. It did nothing but hinder the discussion and make the people who disagreed out to be nasty so-and-so's. It has happened too many times to be an isolated incident.

[Joykins]

Confidentiality (shared computer)
Conflict of Interests (http://www.christianforums.com/t5378096-public-appeal-d-ann-arbitrary-unjustified-deletion.html)

I would ASSume most CF staffers share computers, with non-staff, even.

I share a computer. I leave CF cookied. It is entirely possible, though highly unlikely, that my husband or 6-year-old might happen upon something confidential--not that they'd know or care if they did. Husband thinks all messageboards except his are lame, and 6-yo thinks anything but games are lame, but STILL...

[WesleyJohn]

It has been my observation since the time I was an admin that D'Ann couldn't sit by and let discussions proceed when the discussion centered around a policy or decision Bob was instrumental in without vilifying everyone who disagreed, which led to even higher feelings on both sides. It did nothing but hinder the discussion and make the people who disagreed out to be nasty so-and-so's. It has happened too many times to be an isolated incident.

I actually watched D'Ann jump to defense of her husband in DR, and then promptly used her staff authority to delete her own post. She should have edited it with a "nevermind," but instead, she improperly used her authority to make the post disappear.

[jenda]

I understand it is a natural feeling to not like to see the one you love put in a bad spot or light, and she was only responding out of love, and I know she regrets it when it happens, however, it exemplifies why a husband and wife team should not be on senior staff together (and maybe not even on staff at all together.)

[seebs]

I would ASSume most CF staffers share computers, with non-staff, even.

I share a computer. I leave CF cookied. It is entirely possible, though highly unlikely, that my husband or 6-year-old might happen upon something confidential--not that they'd know or care if they did. Husband thinks all messageboards except his are lame, and 6-yo thinks anything but games are lame, but STILL...

Wow.

I would have assumed almost no one shared a computer.

[Joykins]

Wow.

I would have assumed almost no one shared a computer.

I got my Very Own computer around Mother's Day.

But I'm using our family computer now because it's a desktop. When you have to get up and down a lot to tend to a sick child and your laptop can only be used with a lapdesk, the desktop is a more attractive option.

[seebs]

Well, to put it in perspective, I have something like 8 computers that are personally mine, and everyone in the house has at least one personal computer that is just that person's. I am probably not a representative sample; it just wouldn't have even occurred to me that people wouldn't have individual computers, or would have a shared system.

[Swart]

Well, there is Mr. & Mrs. NewMan99 and Mr. & Mrs. I'ddie4Him

It is really hard to have a decent discussion when there are negative things that need to be said about one of them and the other just keeps jumping in and making defensive remarks that have nothing to do with the discussion. (Not negative in the sense of not liking them, or calling them doodyheads, but negative in the sense of not agreeing with their interpretation (or institution) of policy.
It's the "tag-teeming" that annoys me. To give the "feeling" of objectivity.

(Honey, I don't like this guy I'm debating with. Can you issue a warning for me?)

I'll post a link when I can find it.

[Jayne]

Who's Mrs Iddie4Him?

[seebs]

Who's Mrs Iddie4Him?

E-beth.

[Jayne]

I'd actually have guessed suzy given how much she seems to cover for him.