[Kzyxtalk] any ideas for feedback ?

[David Gurney]

Dear Mark Perkins,

With all due respect, I think you should stick to the technical side of
things, and not try to create Stasi-like files on programmers, staff, or
board members at KZYX.

...


On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 10:10 AM, id <marktime at mcn.org> wrote:

>
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 1:34 PM, doug mckenty wrote:
>
> > Where did this come from?  I looked around the KZYX web site and did
> > not see this, nor did I find the agenda for Monday's meeting BTW.
>
>    Hi Doug , Tim
>    I pulled the two official lists off KZYX web site around 2007 when we
> were working to improve some aspects of the station .
>
>    I made the third as a template or starting place after reviewing A.
> Maslow's work on maturity .  Feel free to modify for the better . When
> sent in , they should become part of the stations FCC files, records ,
> open to the public . Thanks for you work .
>
>   Tim , as you know , a whopper Earthquake will again hit our region ,
> we have 4 or so studios , and three transmitters and need to implement
> a way to cobble together some sort of working system in the aftermath
> of a big EQ . As it is , everything is Philo centric , if a weak link
> in Philo fails , the whole system is down . I feel it would be wise to
> enable the local studios to access the local transmitters as a
> potential failsafe so that there will be / some / post diaster signal
> on the air to aid in recovery . Do you know if KZYX, HAS a Diaster Plan
> ?
>     Please check out the scenarios in  Cascadia Region Earthquake
> Workgroup : crew.org
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Maslow
>            Most folks have no idea of the scale of what happens in a
> major subduction event , and we are due for some .
> m
>
> >
> > Programs and programmers are supposed to come under yearly review
> > according to the current Station Handbook.  This is standard operating
> > procedure at most community radio stations and is not meant to be
> > Orwellian, just a way to increase production value.
> >
> > One of the major aspects I really liked about the PAC was that it gave
> > transparency to this process in order to ensure objectivity.
> >
> > Doug
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Tim Bray <tbray at wildblue.net> wrote:
> >> The two evaluation forms for programmers were developed by the
> >> Program Advisory Council in 2007.  The PAC put in a LOT of time and
> >> effort developing those.
> >>
> >>  The one for Staff & Board is new to me, and it looks like a rough
> >> draft.  Who developed it, and who would use it?  If it's a serious
> >> effort and there is an actual process to apply it, then it should be
> >> reworked to be more usable.
> >>
> >>  The purpose of program evaluations was to improve the quality of
> >> our locally-produced shows.  The Program Director wanted some
> >> objective way of identifying which programmers needed improvement,
> >> and of communicating that to those programmers.  I think the hope was
> >> that such a process would diffuse some of the angry and defensive
> >> reactions expressed by some programmers against the PD.
> >>
> >>  Not sure what the purpose of a Board-member evaluation would be;
> >> isn't this what elections are for?
> >>
> >>  Tim
> >>
> >> --
> >> Ecology Hour
> >> Oak & Thorn
> >>  Facebook: Oak and Thorn
> > _______________________________________________
> > Kzyxtalk mailing list
> > Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
> > http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kzyxtalk mailing list
> Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/kzyxtalk/attachments/20140711/b02b99cb/attachment.html