Occurs to me I may have been overly harsh on Neapolitan, and if so I apologise, though I still find his stance disappointing. However it does serve to illustrate the fact that not everyone here is or can be as committed to the club as others, and with that in mind I'd like to propose something.
I feel that in order to belong to any club, even a stupid internet one, there are certain responsibilities that members have to accept. You can't just be a member and do nothing. Sure it's all in fun and enjoyment but at the same time you can't say you belong to a club without being prepared to give something back.
So here's what I suggest: a three-tier level of membership. First tier we already have: Core Membership. This is, at the moment, restricted to Unknown Solider, Anteater and myself, as the founders and movers of the club. It's up to us to make sure there is always an album to review, and that our own reviews are published in time. It's also our responsibility to basically run the club, and if one should be sick or unable to participate for a short while the other two should be able to step in. That's Core Membership, and it would be open to anyone who can agree to make that sort of commitment to the club.
Second level I would propose is Standard Membership. This would still mean that you would have to review every album but in recognition of the fact that maybe you have not as much time to devote to the club as us, or are not as interested in or committed to it, Standard members would be allowed an extension for their reviews, anything from ten to fourteen days, after which their reviews MUST be up.
Once all Core and Standard Members have posted their reviews I would total the scores up and award the overall average for each album. Scoring for that album would then be closed.
The last tier would be Associate Membership. This would be for the one-off, come-in-come-out members who wanted to review an album once in a while, comment, talk, discuss and hang around but who would not be relied upon for their reviews. None of their scores would be included at any stage in the average for an album. Naturally, anyone wishing to move from one tier to a higher (or lower) could be achieved if their workload/interest/commitment changed.
I don't want to come across as dictatorial or draconian on this, but I really feel to make the club work we need people to take it seriously, and I'd rather have four dedicated members than twenty so-so ones.
So, what do you think? In order for this to be ratified I feel it should only have to be approved by the three Core Members, then we can ask who wants to be at what level.
Comments welcome: let's try to make this the best album club on Music Banter, but to do that we all need to be prepared to put in a shift and justify our membership. Fair?
__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018
|