PDA

View Full Version : Critique, Final Before Request to Staff



Christopher K. Hartley
04-12-2007, 9:29 AM
After re-reading the thread started earlier and examining the poll. This would be my suggestion. One thing I have learned over the years is that new projects are often better received and developed by using a pilot process. I know what Jim shared with us about a separate area:


...And it appears that Kieth is "game" for a dedicated critique area if there is a mutual decision to do it as well as some warm bodies to step up to the task...
However, I believe we might want to pilot the program here on our regular site for a period of at least 60 days and maybe 90 days depending on responses. Then when the results support the extra time and work necessary to set up the separate area there will be viable justification and established value for the staff to feel good about moving forward on the project. By following this method we can also tweak the program where we may need to be adjusted as it rolls out. I know there are a few individuals with valid concerns about how the program will impact the site. I believe their concerns have merit and if we see that miss-use or abuse of the program begins to demonstrate those concerns we can certainly pull the plug very easily. It will be important that all using the program hold themselves accountable to the guidelines. I suggest, based on the comments, that the guidelines be posted as a sticky here on the turning forum after review by the staff. In response to the manpower we need to follow through we have, according to the poll, 10 individuals who have stepped forward and answered yes to "If asked, I would be willing to serve as a Mentor". That number is somewhat firm and according to the guidelines, anyone can step into the role. I do not at this time know if other support personnel are needed but I will step up to any role I can play to aid in this project's fulfillment. Sorry, but we need to poll just one more time to see if everyone is good with this approach. If we are ok wite this then I will find out where we need to go from here.

Christopher K. Hartley
04-13-2007, 9:36 AM
We're not getting much vote response on this. Has it been overlooked or do we just need to forget about it?:confused:

Ben Werner
04-14-2007, 11:25 AM
It should NOT be forgotten! I haven't posted in these threads because I would just be repeating everyone else's words, but I figured this thread needed to be bumped up so more people would see it and vote. Either say yes or no!! there is no reason why there arent more votes... it takes just 2 clicks... one to select the vote, and the other to select: Vote! 259 views and only 29 votes??!! come on!! thats nearly one out of 10 people voting... you people should be :o:o so go vote and become: :cool::D

Everyone Vote!! :D:D:D
(well thats my best shot at rousing the crowd ;):D)

Pat Salter
04-14-2007, 11:34 AM
a line from "the West Wing"

Decisions are made by those that show up.



a "NO" vote is better than no vote.

Ken Fitzgerald
04-14-2007, 11:37 AM
Chris...I think there may have been too many ideas batted around on the original post for me to vote.


1.....are we going to just indicate in the title of a thread we want critiquing...

2. Are we going to have a panel?

3. Are we going to have it in a separate forum?

Ben Werner
04-14-2007, 12:41 PM
Ken:
if you go here Chris wrote a document for posters. I think it should clarify your confusion. :D

http://sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=55693&page=3

Dennis Peacock
04-14-2007, 2:13 PM
If we care about growing and improving as woodturners? Then we really should "wisely" use a turning critique method. There should be some clear guidelines for anyone wishing to "toss in their 2¢ worth" in a critique.

Without guidelines for one to use so that they can better understand how to look at the turning and how to best judge "in their opinion" each area, it could be a wild ride. At least with a critique "guide" it makes the playing field even and with expected results.

Just an idea.

Christopher K. Hartley
04-14-2007, 3:31 PM
Ok, just for clarity. Here are the revised guidelines. The revision
was a minor word change and a major impact change. This is what we
will ask to have made a sticky as stated earlier.:)

Pat Salter
04-14-2007, 8:46 PM
something that may help the mentors would be a form similar to the one used by the AAW. it can be found here: http://www.woodturner.org/community/chapters/eval_form_2004.pdf

Christopher K. Hartley
04-14-2007, 8:50 PM
something that may help the mentors would be a form similar to the one used by the AAW. it can be found here: http://www.woodturner.org/community/chapters/eval_form_2004.pdf
Pat, great idea! Do you think they would mind us using this or should we revise for SMC use?:) Forget the question we probably need to do our own. They have some good stuff in it though. Would anyone like to tackle this project?