The BAJR Federation - moving the forum

[Austin Ainsworth]

:face-topic:

[chiz]

So it will be an overhaul of the whole of Bajr, with extra fora for the federation, and separate fora within that? Which are free to evolve and maybe even develop into something else? Can you post a Venn diagramme showing the relationships!!

An inclusive arena in which groups can discuss/host/communicate? As per existing BAJR, but with separate sections. Can I suggest that the 'section' aspect needs looking into carefully? What I like about Bajr is that anyone can pitch in (some of us too often!), and eg the metal detecting forum, is an arena in which people who would not otherwise talk to each other, do so, and discuss issues openly. I would like to see this continue. I don't think we maybe need all the existing fora, as there is a lot of crossover and there could be some amalgamation? and with say another ten sections, it may become unmanageable?

Concept sounds sensible, out of interest do groups like AAI&S and ADA etc have a 'forum' at present? I think some of these groups have facebook groups, but I don't use that. In fact doesn't BAJR have a facebook group? Are these groups actually saying they want a web-forum hosted here? I can see some problems:

You talk of validation into sections, eg by AAI&S, yet how will this work? I am a professional illustrator as part of my work, yet have not chosen to join the AAI&S, but am a member of the IfA Survey and Illustration SIG (which anyone interested can join). Am I allowed in? Someone interested in illustration, eg a student, would want to be a part of discussions and I can imagine gaining a lot from such a forum, but how are they allowed in? So if there is an official AAI&S forum (members only), there would have to be a further non-AAI&S members forum for all the people interested in illustration, but not in the AAI&S? You say by invite only? But these are subscription based groups, why should they allow someone in for nothing? What is their opinion? And invitation only excludes the interested party or useful tangental view from a separate discipline.
Do you see my point?
We could have full accredited members (validated by professional group) and 'prospects', but what about for your field archaeologist group, the validation would be by membership of the ifA? Are illustrators allowed in Field Archaeology? Who says someone is a field archaeologist? Or not?

Will we lose a lot of the free-flow of opinion, ideas and knowledge that we currently get from having all fora open to all members?

I like the idea of documentation available to all, or just members, and would repeat my suggestion that certain documents could be commissioned by Sections and available for a small fee, any eventual profits going back into the organisation (eg model contracts for freelancers, model terms and conditions and other 'legal' stuff that would need paying for/checking professionally)

Calendar sounds good, again, does it need to have separate calendars by group? An active group sells itself to new members by having lots of events/meetings/seminars etc, and by potential members seeing that the group offers a lot of bang for their buck. Have a single calendar with a checklist of 'sections', like in the find a specialist map?

Costs? Again, I'd repeat my concerns from the old thread (which no-one answered). How much will this cost, just in domain rental, electricity, harddrive/computer space (especially with potentially thousands of photos), let alone time. This should not be allowed to be born by David, its not fair, and it leaves the organisation in his control, which is wrong if the organisation is to be what is intended. It should not either be, or seen to be, his 'football' that he can take away when he doesn't want to play anymore.
I know we're all skint, but we have to accept that there are costs, and know what they are. This needs a statement from David so we can see where we stand. It may be a ?1 a year sub, or a ?5 one-off membership fee, I don't know.
If BAJR would be hosting fora for professional, subscription bodies, then should they be charged for this service?

Can I ask who would share the admin time, presumably one or two moderators from each section would put a bit of time in keeping things up to date? I don't want David getting snowed under with more, unpaid work. We are all in this together, pull your weight! I am personally disappointed by the lack of discussion on the Fed idea, apart from a few people, and some very interesting points, most people seem to have chosen not to participate in the discussion about whether it is needed, what it should be, and how it should operate. This is really very sad, and I would hope that more people would realise that we're all responsible for the state we're in, and we can't expect someone else to do it for us....

I don't care about hats, I care about whether this will work!
K.I.S.S.!!

[Oxbeast]

Hello Bob,
I'd be happy to contribute a few quid a year towards a BAJR federation, if I could work out how it would be different to what there is at the moment. The discussions of the membership criteria seemed to exclude me at the moment, and the forum seems to be geared towards self employed/short contract/specialists who are members of groups.

I agree with you that seperate closed fora are a bad idea. I notice that the British Women archaeologists forum has now gone, but not so long ago I noticed that no-one had posted in there for a year. I'm not sure that having seperate sections will encourage more people to post; surely everything can be discussed here?

I like your idea of providing model contracts though...

[chiz]

Hello Oxbeast,
I think, but don't know, that the new fed would be open to anyone who signs up to it? but since very few people bothered to discuss membership, who knows! I don't think it was geared originally to be for people already in Groups, but to complement the existing groups as a pressure/lobby/mutual grouping for those who are not in formal or long term employment.

Are we talking about essentially the old BAJR, plus hosting private fora for existing professional groups? I too noticed a distinct lack of traffic on the BWA forum, but maybe all the action is on facebook, I dunno, all this fragmentation into little empires and new media does my head in, I don't have time to check 10 fora/facebook/twitter feeds a day. I pop in here for the jobs really, the rest is all fluff and nonsense at the end of the day. But given it exists, lets all be open and share our views and questions, that is the value in this place, you post a question, or opinion, and get replies from outside your comfort zone, from curators, bosses, students, nutters....

As a freelancer I personally would like a group to help me and my kind within archaeology, an IFA Special Interest Group for freelancers would actually be ideal, and model contracts, T&Cs and the like could be provided cheap if enough signed up to cover the cost.

I thought the Digger's Forum covered a lot of what the Fed wanted to do, but then no-one joined that......

[Unitof1]

Shouldn?t you all be discussing this inside the federation, not out side here in intergalactic space where because of infinity everything is pointless and we don?t need to have an identity and can ramble ad infinitum at the long tail. Just out of interest inside the federation are you named and are your entry certificates verified by a committee of judges? No I am Sparadokos

[Oxbeast]

"get replies from outside your comfort zone, from curators, bosses, students, nutters...."

This week, mostly nutters.

That is one of the big upsides of BAJR as it is though, that you get perspectives from people who own/run/manage companies, as well as from specialists, etc. I personally feel like I've learned more from those threads than from the 'Ooo isn't is all awful' threads.

[BAJR Host]

All good stuff..

will get to grips on Saturday.

Needless to say, the main BAJR forum, where everyone talks will exist... the validation is in someways peer orientated - and by invite... so you can ask to join a group. and the group decides.

These groups may or may not be open ... that will be up to the group...

as has been said on Britarch (oh yes... it happened again) it will either suceed or fail...

Diggers Forum.. it may have failed... but it can still suceed.. with support...

Time mOney etc... pah.... I have time to sleep when I die! and it should be no more work than this..

as I say, will answer and discuss specifics on Saturday

Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself into a false position.
Mohandas Gandhi

[chiz]

quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host


Diggers Forum.. it may have failed... but it can still suceed.. with support...

sorry David but I have to take issue with the first bit of that comment. Although I know what you really mean, many might not.

The Diggers Forum (with which I am no more connected than by being a member) has managed to get several members onto the IFA council, these are solid field archaeologists who represent the views, aspirations and opinions of site archaeologists within the IFA (of which I am also a member). They have created a voice within the IFA to represent those site workers who previously felt they did not have any voice. The DF has actively campaigned on several issues relating to pay and conditions and has achieved some success. Of course it hasn't changed everything, and is only one part of the lobbying regarding fair pay etc, but it has achieved something in getting people who consider themselves 'diggers' onto council. It certainly has not 'failed' and to suggest that is a bit disingenuous to say the least.

The DF is open to ALL, whether they work on site or not, and whether they are in the IFA or not. It is free to all IFA members, and a fiver a year for non-members. unfortunately there has been a very small take-up by those that the DF represents and campaigns for. But they still carry on representing site workers wherever they can in meetings and emails, mostly unreported, and mostly unthanked.

Now I will be the first to agree that the DF has not publicised itself well over the last few years, and that this is somewhat embarrassing. That probably has something to do with the fact that the people running it (unpaid, in their spare time) are also out on site all year, some literally spending every day on site.

I would hope that the DF can be relaunched soon and get the support of the people it is still campaigning for. With the support of those concerned about the pay, conditions and career opportunities of the site archaeologists, the DF can continue to get members on council actively raising the views of the site workers, and can increase its campaigns outside of council.

But that all relies on support.


I look forward to hearing your specific replies after the weekend.

[Kathryn Whittington]

Our groups are run by volunteers and, as I am sure everybody can appreciate, a lot of our committed and active members have had their time taken up with their jobs lately. I do however have a meeting with Jez in a couple of weeks to discuss Diggers' Forum matters, so hopefully people will see new action/publicity from the group soon.

[BAJR Host]

I should add that perhaps the word failed was innappropriate.. It has got members on the Council... etc.

I did buy a webdomain for them, and create a simple web blog system, and then handed over the paswords and running - so that I no longer had control of it.. however, this has now lapsed - it was a perfect place to spend a few minutes a week, telling people what was going on, how to join, etc.

BAJR is also run by volunteers.. and I also work (still am in fact - have another few hours before the end of the day - been out on site all this week) - this is not a critisism on the DF in general or anyone in particluar, - It is a simple statement that up to this point, the mebership is still low, the publicity is low, and the activities are unreported as you say. As a member of the DF myself, I support the principal, and the people - however, I would like to know what is being done, would like to be able to report and thank them for what they do. Just don't know what it is.


My last communication was in February, where we were informed that a representation to the Council was being made - but what happened.

Jez also kindly made this comment

On a separate issue, you may know that David Connolly who runs the BAJR website is setting up the 'BAJR Federation' as, amongst other related things, a lobby group to represent the interests of archaeologists. David has been extremely supportive of the Diggers' Forum and we wish him well with the Federation, and I hope and expect that the DF will work with the Federation as both groups evolve.

And to this I say yes... the Federation can work with the DF.. indeed the DF could be the representative body for Field Archs... utilising the mass reach available. I say yes to close cooperation with them, supporting and indeed being supported. The DF (as it stands just now) , needs support to succeed - that support is and will be there.

Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself into a false position.
Mohandas Gandhi