Executive Board (staff)

From Blitzed

People often make the mistake of comparing IRC networks to governments, and demanding democracy. In the context of an IRC network (and many other Internet resources), democracy simply does not work.

(Representative) Democracy as used by modern governments of the world is based around the idea that its constituents contribute to the society they are part of, and fund that society with their taxes. In return, they get the opportunity to direct that society.

IRC networks, however, are run by goodwill of their staff alone. Of course, you don't have an IRC network without users, but to get users all you need is a stable network and enough time. User requirements are simply that the network works, and broadly as long as it does, they are happy. Other problems may arise which annoy the users, and how well the network can protect the users from these problems determines if the users stay. But having good staff who are able to contribute their time and resources is of the utmost importance and is the first priority.

So, that removes the idea of users having too much say in how the network is governed. Now we must decide what the balance of power is amongst the staff. The only motivation for staff members to donate their resources is the hope that by doing so they can help to make something which is more satisfying for them than what they could do alone. This is why people with IRC servers link them to larger networks.

Some networks, like EFnet, do not have nick and channel services, and apart from a few common rules for network stability, each server's staff have pretty much a free hand in how they run their server. Staff from one server do not tend to affect staff and users on another server unless by prior agreement. On these networks, they don't need to make a lot of network-wide decisions and there aren't any network-wide resources to manage (like nick and channel databases).

These networks are able to function in a state of near-anarchy, only requiring group decisions to be made for matters like linking of new hubs. The only real shared resources are client servers, so any matter can be dealt with on a "one vote per server" basis. They don't require an Executive Board or anything like it. In fact their model of network is quite hostile to any central power structure, which they would perceive as a weakness. And that's fair enough. The problem is, many users demand nick and channel services.

To answer this demand, there are networks like DALnet. DALnet is used as an example of a large IRC network with services. On the surface, Blitzed appears a lot like DALnet because Blitzed is also "a network with services." If you look closer at Blitzed then we hope you will find a lot that is different about us, but to a casual inspection Blitzed is indeed a mini-DALnet.

Networks such as Blitzed have a single domain name which all its servers live under. They have network-wide nick and channel services. They have a single web site, official network mailing lists etc etc.. In short, there is a lot more "shared network property" in contrast with networks like EFnet where there is none.

Suddenly, life gets a lot more complicated. Now disputes between server admins aren't anywhere near so simple. What if some of those admins also run Services? What if some of them are responsible for coding the IRC server? What if some of them host the mailing lists or the web site? What if one of them owns the domain name? In an arms race between these admins, the guy with the domain name has the biggest stack of warheads, but all the rest own enough firepower for mutually assured destruction too. One day they might wake up to find there are no users and no network left anymore, just some smoking ruins.

What is needed to avoid all this and yet still be able to manage lots of resources, is a benevolent dictator. Such a dictator does have ultimate power, but they command it only because their subjects feel they are doing a good job. They don't go around abusing their status, they just get on with the job, and everyone knows where they stand and what they have to be doing.

This is what Blitzed's Executive Board aims to be. There are multiple of us (at time of writing, 3) so that there is less chance of one of us getting a bit carried away. We only exist to provide some direction and motivation to the resources that all of the staff are willing to donate, and to arbitrate disputes between members of staff without harming the network in the process. We try to keep ultimate ownership of all of the most important Blitzed resources, so that there is less chance that the network explodes from internal tension.

We don't think we are anything special nor do we expect to be treated any differently to any other members of Blitzed staff. Our roles are in fact usually very boring and/or unpleasant as by definition we have to deal with problems that no one else wanted.

There are currently no procedures for adding or removing people to/from the Executive Board. If you're not happy with something that the EB (or one of its members) is doing, you need to make us aware of that. We will do everything in our power to resolve disputes amongst staff members, but ultimately you do participate in Blitzed with the understanding that the EB have the final word.