Jump to content

Eric Aitala

Webmaster
  • Posts

    1,153
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    27

Posts posted by Eric Aitala

  1. One is the IPMS/USA #, the other is the internal Wild Apricot number. Both can be said to be a valid IPMS/USA membership numbers.

    Members with 'historic' IPMS numbers will get both

    E

    12 hours ago, jcorley said:

    So weird, here is what I see

     

    Screenshot_20240117-214359_Chrome.jpg

     

    • Like 1
  2. There is no sorting on the full list as far as I can determine. Some of the sub-lists may be sorted chronologically

    E

    2 hours ago, highflight said:

    Eric, could several volunteers take care of it from their own machines, given appropriate access and a current list? Divide and conquer, as it were. Each person tackle 3-4 last name letters by alphabetical listing? Four each would be seven people. I'd help. Could be done within a week, I think.  Is the juice worth that squeeze for the admins to be able to maintain it from there?

    RB

     

  3. There are currently 14000 members on the FB Group.  The interface to remove/block members is... primitive, i.e. go through the list one by one, check each members name to make sure they are who they say they are, then remove them. 

    E

    2 hours ago, Highlander said:

    I believe, but am not sure, that a FB moderator can remove members from a page.  If I am correct, the page moderator, with a list of current IPMS members, could remove access to all not on that list.

     

    • Like 1
  4. I do not believe this is technically possible unless you want to hand vet every single member of the group to make sure they are a current IPMS member. Which would include when their IPMS membership expired.

    E

    21 minutes ago, CaptainAhab said:

    This right here should be the main focus of any new “ Director of Social Media” person! In my humble opinion our FB page should allow IPMS members to post and comment, anyone else can only visit and look.

     

  5. I agree that in general rules for content are difficult - Masnick's Impossibility Theorem - if not impossible. But there has to be something, both for the members and moderators.

    Here is an example, we've had companies submit multiple (10+) posts to the FB Group at one time.  If there is no hard rule on number of ad/company posts per week, I as a moderator am not going to know what to do.  If another moderator allowed all 10 at one point and I do not, then one company is going to be really annoyed.  There needs to be a consistent approach to handling known issues that arise. Where things break down are when there is not an objective item (number of ad posts per week) on which to set a rule.

    E

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  6. Let's see -

    • set up an actual social media strategy, now and for the future
    • has experience in the various platforms
    • find new ways to engage our current membership and prospective members
    • be able to set up rules for the various platforms, and chain of command for the moderators, admins, etc.
    • co-ordinate between Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and other platforms, including ones IPMS is not currently using
    • interact with our other public facing spaces - the Journal, the home page, the reviews site, the forums, the gallery, etc.  Which may include strategic planning and co-ordination

    I made an argument a while back (8 months ago?) that we needed an overall Director of Communications to handle many of the situations we find ourselves in...  Given the silliness that took place before and after, the DSM role is a start.

    E

    54 minutes ago, ghodges said:

    Why Eric? Please explain why it's needed, and what "problems" this person is supposed to solve?

    I understand the idea of IPMSUSA wanting to be able to say they have "someone on the job".... but to do what exactly? Monitor? Try to control? Censor posts?

     

    Gil :cool:

     

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 2
  7. We've been working on the Director of Social Media position for two month(?) now and completed the interviews on Monday January 8th and sent our recommendation to the Executive Board before the resignations were announced. This is a needed position for handling our social media, now and in the future.

    Eric

    14 minutes ago, ghodges said:

    I'm still worried when I read the Presidents statement that the Eboard is still trying to create a "Social Media Director" when two MUCH more important positions need filling first. It shows me THIS Eboard still has their focus on the WRONG things, like trying to control FB and creating "ethics committees" (according to the Dec. minutes); when they've communicated NO solutions for revamping the NCC and getting the new contest rules they proposed for Madison printed and rolled out in time. Could THIS be the problem on the horizon causing Eboard members to resign before the crap hits the proverbial fan?

    Gil :cool:

     

    • Like 2
  8. Let me check - I may be able to pull threads back out... Will see tonight. E
    1 hour ago, ghodges said:

    So Eric..... are you saying that by wiping Jim's account, it erased any TOPIC he started, or you erased EVERY TOPIC in which he had a REPLY within? 

    Please clarify the ramifications of "wiping Jim Clark's account", because we need to know if you also wiped out every other person's topic he simply participated in.

     

    Gil :cool:

     

    • Like 1
  9. It would not be a matter of money but of Facebook, well, being Facebook. Getting anything to work with them is a nightmare which is why the IPMS/USA Facebook page (not the group) no longer gets news, events, and review updates automatically.

    E

    18 minutes ago, CaptainAhab said:

    ... and Eric is right, manually checking member numbers would be too much, there may be an automated way, but IPMS wouldn’t pay what it probably cost.

     

    • Like 2
    • Confused 1
  10. Hi,

    There are actually seven people who are group admins...

    We could set up a non-public page however there is not, as far as I am aware, any real mechanism to ensure those members are valid members of IPMS/USA.  Doing it 'by hand' is not practical.

    Eric

    11 minutes ago, BWScholten said:

    I belong to a handful of Military Groups on FakeBook.  Some groups have a public page and a second members only page, while the other groups are members only.

    That could eliminate the non-member screams.

    IPMS-USA also needs to add moderators to the page.  My understanding is we have a single admin/moderator for the page.  That's too much for a single person (FWIW, I am a mod on two FB pages).

    Going back to the current debate.  I am going to Madison, and will volunteer to Judge.  I doubt I will volunteer for other areas as I want to enjoy the convention, and volunteering every day can be a killjoy.

     

    • Like 2
  11. Oh, I figure plenty of emails and phone calls happened too..  But considering it was announced on the internet, why shouldn't people complain there?

    And how does where the complaining takes place change any of the facts?

    E

    27 minutes ago, Bert said:

    The unanswered queation.....why? Because of complaints on the internet? It makes no sense to me. But what do I know? Plenty things now make no sense to me.

     

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...