CASAA | Web Site

[Darkest]

There should be a user area, but the forums should stay here. There would just be to much keep up with that would detract from our primary purpose. I agree about the pics, we need pics that show us a main stream Americans that vape, not some whacked out off the wall people that no one can relate to and not generic people pics that obviously aren't us.

[mtndude]

I see the point of not having any discussions of planning done outside the community, as this serves to encourage participation. Where the chalkboard is located is not relevant, in respect to community efforts. Although visibility is higher at the ECF and probably will remain that way, eventually there will be need for more formal collaboration. I suppose that's what Thulium's concerns are.

If my understanding is correct, there will be community members serving as elected officials and/or representatives of the community at large. Again, I don't know how to go about effective "official meetings" nor do I suppose to be a participant. But I do feel that a truly democratic process needs to be transparent and somewhat more formal.

[Thulium]

I see the point of not having any discussions of planning done outside the community, as this serves to encourage participation. Where the chalkboard is located is not relevant, in respect to community efforts. Although visibility is higher at the ECF and probably will remain that way, eventually there will be need for more formal collaboration. I suppose that's what Thulium's concerns are.

If my understanding is correct, there will be community members serving as elected officials and/or representatives of the community at large. Again, I don't know how to go about effective "official meetings" nor do I suppose to be a participant. But I do feel that a truly democratic process needs to be transparent and somewhat more formal.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I'm talking about. Of course we want to be as open as possible with our plans and methods, but if we are "too" open, privacy and intellectual property rights start to come up. For example, I have an idea that I've been PM'ing with Webby about that will eventually be something we can talk about openly, but if we're not careful somebody could theoretically steal the idea who doesn't adhere to the same ideals as the rest of us and our own work could be used against against us. Conversations meant to be "spitballing" or "brainstorming" sessions could be invaded by trolls and the resulting drama or even just somebody's sarcastic writing style could get taken out of context and we could find ourselves fighting for our own good name instead of our stated cause.

[kinabaloo]

Although you planted the idea that anyone who might disagree is a troll, i will still point out that secret discussions between certian members does not look good, whatever the merits in this case.

Concensus is one thing but hidden discussions is quite another, and does not sit well with the notion that the group is inclusive.

Just saying, as I don't know the nature of the secret.

[Thulium]

Although you planted the idea that anyone who might disagree is a troll, i will still point out that secret discussions between certian members does not look good, whatever the merits in this case.

Concensus is one thing but hidden discussions is quite another, and does not sit well with the notion that the group is inclusive.

Just saying, as I don't know the nature of the secret.

I had no intention of planting the idea that anyone who disagrees is a troll, I was referring to actual trolls. People with malicious or mischievous intent who get other people upset and saying stupid things that can be taken out of context. Alternately a troll could be from the other side of a legal case, or a representative from Big Pharma/FDA/whatver trying to dig up dirt.

There's no hidden agenda, there's meeting you have with open doors and meetings you have with closed doors--you still keep records, but without a closed door you might not feel free to share unfinished work.

I wasn't referring to any particular secret, but the genesis of this point is a merchandising idea that I wanted to share with a few people but I didn't want it released to the public domain of the internet where anyone could simply steal it. It's unlikely the idea would ever be sold, but rather given away or simply discarded, but I wanted to reserve the right to make that decision later.

We have private messages on this site for the same reasons--not so that people can carry out nefarious or discriminatory goals, but simply because some things you just don't want to leave out in the open.

There's no dark secret, and just because some meetings might be held behind closed doors doesn't mean the doors are locked.

[kinabaloo]

I can accept it is still a personal idea shared with friends for now.

Some ideas, though good, can't run because of conflicts of interests, or unfair competition (true even if free), or ...

I hope you do have a good idea, and it can run.

[mtndude]

i had posted something about having an idea that i would pm webby and thulium about earlier in another thread. just to clear things up, if anyone was wondering...

there was some debate over smokeless vs smoke-free.. i saw that a domain name acronym was available that could be an alternative to CASAA.org, it was a matter of paranoia, on my part, that someone would snatch it up and hold it for ransom or take it of the table entirely

[kinabaloo]

I rather like the term 'smoke free', simple. But if I'm not mistaken, when i reasearch this term i found it is in use by part of the FDA or DOH or EPA or CDC or NIH.

I am all for heath freedom. But for reasons stated before see e-cigs in their own class. I'm not sure it is wise to take the broad umbrella approach, but if that is the concensus, so be it.

[Thulium]

I can accept it is still a personal idea shared with friends for now.

Some ideas, though good, can't run because of conflicts of interests, or unfair competition (true even if free), or ...

I hope you do have a good idea, and it can run.

Well, my hope is to be able to share this idea with CASAA to usue if members chose to do so...but since it is potentially profitable, there could be a conflict of interest if it is not packaged correctly. It needs to start as a "personal idea" but I think it can be made non-profit-friendly, but thats when the doors open...not during the planning phase.

But we can use other examples such as the PSA offer thread eslewhere here at ECF: Some things such as spitballing ideas can be done in a public forum, but not everything...lets say we did not have a unanimous decision on the actor to be in our PSA. Someone who did not support our goals could read a member's critique and use that to bash us: "Even CASAA's own founder said, 'I thought the performance was wooden and didn't get the message across'" ....THAT sort of thing.

Also, to be effective, some meetings need to be held in real-time. We may need to gather a consensus on multiple issues in a short period of time and a public forum may not be the best way to accomplish that. At some point we'll need to draft bylaws, and considering that it took multiple weeks just to choose a name--that might not even have a majority of members full support--I'm thinking that a more private discussion in a live web meeting might be more effective. Once the work has been done, the final product would of course be submitted to the open forum for approval, but we don't need to do all our work outside.

[Thulium]

i had posted something about having an idea that i would pm webby and thulium about earlier in another thread. just to clear things up, if anyone was wondering...

there was some debate over smokeless vs smoke-free.. i saw that a domain name acronym was available that could be an alternative to CASAA.org, it was a matter of paranoia, on my part, that someone would snatch it up and hold it for ransom or take it of the table entirely

Well, if you just had the money to purchase all the possible domain names we discussed, there wouldn't be a problem. Instead, our name debate was open to attack--anybody who opposed us could've bought CASAA.org before we could or a member could've abrogated undue control over the process by making ideas he/she didn't like look like they weren't available...that sort of thing.

Some projects will require privacy at the beginning for reasons like that. Other projects that involve working with other groups or dealing with especially controversial issues might need privacy in the middle of the process. Still other projects might require some privacy toward the end. Who knows at this point? Maybe we won't ever need it for anything...wouldn't we still want tools available to us even if we don't ever use them?

On the bottom line is there are some extremely controversial issues at play here and I don't want us to spend all our time defending our own reputation from internal conflicts.