I vote jw select the 'reference group' and that they remain as the reference group until they are either no longer needed or no longer wanting to do it. Rotating the members could mean that we change how things are run all the time and that it should be based on competancy rather than everyone getting a turn.

Alright so , since this is an open thread I’ll write a few words ( more than a few) myself , my opinion of this . So , all the participants in the contest enjoy being a part of it , the fact itself proves it . All the ‘older members’ have been a part of the contest for ages , they care about the contest , they have been a part of the contest since the very first steps and want the contest to continue being the best but it doesn’t mean the ‘new’ ones don’t care at all . This site gets many members during eurovision and they are the so called ‘ seasonal members’ but a only few of them stick around because they like the site , the company and the contest idea seems very attractive , if they didn’t care they wouldn’t be here , they joined the contest lately only because they had no idea that this site existed before nor the contest , so the point is – we are all the same , the ‘older members’ deserve respect for their loyalty and I personally totally respect them cause they played an important role making the contest what it is now ... Anyway I think JW should choose the ‘group’ which is gonna lead the contest the upcoming editions cause he’s the site owner and gave his heart and soul trying to make this contest great and its his right to decide, most of us will probably agree with anything as long as the contest keeps running. Maybe its not my right to talk at all because im in the middle of nowhere but thank you.

¨
I don't think the case here is about practising some sort of hierarchy, in which old members literally should be awarded more power than the new ones just because they have been here for a longer time of period. I think the point of some people here is that what differs old and new members - is the level of experience. I agree with you that we are all the same when it comes to our enthusiasm and engagement to the contest, but when it comes to experience - we are undoubtly different.

This is why I believe the committee should consist of members who both are enthusiastic to the contest, but also experienced. This may also be the reason why some people here believe that old members meet these conditions better than new members.I mean, you can impossibly select a devouted and crazy world-peace person in their 20s as the head of the UN in front of an experienced old politician in their 50-60s? No matter if new members may be more enthusiastic, there will be a lack of necessary experience.

And they/we will not get the experience because the older members will be hogging it.

Anyone as long as they're capable of that job .

That's not the case if the committe has some sort of transparency to non-panelists. If I have not misunderstood the concept behind the committee, the selected members are only the ones who will have the final say, the decision makers. When it comes to the discussing part of an upcoming case, I don't think it will hurt if non-panelists also can be able to have their say, even though the final decision of a certain case all depends on the panelists I don't think the committe will be as closed as you might think, you get tons of experience by watching how certain cases are dealed and solved. You get enough experience for just being here for a certain amount of time, chatting with friends etc. from this website.

Yes and how do you measure capability? I think you are being very vague now.

In my opinion, capability = enthusiasm & experience That is just my personal opinion!

With that I mean people who're capable of continuing what Jw has done all this time , bringing the contest forward . I guess im missunderstood.

I think you've misunderstood the idea behind the establishment of this committee. The committee that we will see in future, will solely concentrate on interpreting the contest rules and how they should be advocated in upcoming cases. When it comes to the discussion of how to deal with the post-JW era in the contest, we are then talking about something completely different! The very first editions of the contest were not managed by JW, for instans!

Aight , whatever you say.
Its my opinion at the end , I'm free to share it , thank you for your criticizing.

If the idea to let decide the host is bad why don't all
decide every edition with a thread? The host can take 10 people
he wants and then the all members decide for the 5 that have to
form the group. This is a nice idea I think,because The host
can take people he would like to help him and then the all members
have to decide. My idea is 'decide all together but leave the
''power'' to decide WHO to the host.

Well Gianluca, I think the plan is that we have some consistency, which we wouldn't (necessarily) if we adopted your idea.

I voted for the final option, simply because whilst I'm all for taking group decisions and working as a team, past experience here during the very early contests shows that that is unlikely to work. That doesn't mean however that the members here should have no say in the contest, but that the ideas are proposed primarily by a, largely stable, group of 5 people.

We could of course have a veto system whereby any rule proposed by the group is assumed valid unless a poll is created and 50% of people do not agree with the measure, which would ensure that everybody has a say whilst retaining a stable enough system to keep the contest going.

And how grateful we are, jw.

Reading through the posts I realized that some people haven't really understood what this group will be about.
It will not be about changing the contest, the contest has worked fine the way it is for over 2 years with minor changes here and there. The group's responsibility will be to deal with issues that may arise from now on.
For example, it will be there to approve a new participation. Or to decide whether someone can continue participating (there are lots of factors that need to be taken into consideration). Or to ensure that a host is on schedule with the contest's dates. Or to implement a new rule that a member suggests. Etc, etc. etc...things that jj did until now and things that there's absolutely no way that can be done collectively by the members.
PS I totally agree with everything Chel has written, it's not a matter of hierarchy, it's a matter of experience. And when it comes to a new rule etc, of course everyone's opinion will be taken into account.

Like Mina said it's for the future contest issues that may arise and not meant to completely change EVERYTHING about this competition.

Ok, time for my two cents. One reason why this whole thing is being discussed is because some people rarely come to chat, but yet don't miss a contest. We're not heartless and say 'oh something serious happened, too bad for you' - we understand things can happen or schedules can be very filled up, but I for one am a bit sad when I see certain people only show up on results days time and time again.

I think there should be a group supervising, but I' wasn't too sure yet if I preferred the second or third option. In the end I chose the third because I believe it would be harder to get in contact with EVERYONE every time.

And so am I, Luis. I really don't understand how come some people can't 'sacrifice' 1 hour of their time to come to chat and yet they can be here for 2-3 hours before/after the contests. Noone says people should be here for hours on end..I myself rarely stay in chat for more than 1 hour (especially in winter and on schooldays) but I do make a point of coming here, just to 'check' on people I consider friends, make sure everyone is ok, etc etc etc
That problem is even more obvious when it comes to new members..for me, at least. Because we're talking about people we barely know sometimes..and I can't help feeling that some of them treat this site just as a contest site...and that's one thing that the group will have to deal with. Maybe even regarding older members, too (in case someone rushes to say I only complain about newbies).
And once more, our history here was like this: FIRST came the friendship, then the site and THEN the contest, let's all keep that in mind.

Can I just ask? How are we grouping 'new' and 'old' members?

For example, Nick, Adam & Janet are probably all technically 'new' members (in that they haven't been here since the dawn of time), however they would all be incredibly capable on the committee, far more so than myself who, between having an internet connection straight from Nigeria and not being at home in the evenings very much, can't devote massive amounts of time to the site at the moment, despite being here from year dot (I'm sure that when I get into the swing of things at Uni that'll change, but for the moment it's difficult to spent more than a couple of nights a week here).

I hope you get my point, i.e new and old perhaps isn't the best way of classifying people, because whilst for the most part it does show peoples' devotion to the site, it doesn't take into account that many new members may as well have been here since the beginning (remember the a few weeks ago I was saying that I can't remember a time when Nick hasn't been here, so whether he's new or old is wholly irrelevant, really).

Sorry, I may have gone down completely the wrong route.

Jonny,
it's not about who is capable. I'm sure many people are smart and capable and enthusiastic and everything.
The thing is, older members (and I do include Nick and Adam as well as Juli and James) are more experienced to handle problems concerning the contest because we have all talked about it for endless hours, as you know (even though you're not here much lately). That's one thing.
The other thing is that 'original' members are useful on another level, too. Say, for example, that someone from the 'old' people returns and wants to be part of the contest. How on earth will a new member (however capable they may be) decide on that participation? Jarek came back the other day and most new people don't even know him.
Anyway, I'm not 100% against new people as parts of the group (by new I mean people who have taken part in less than 10 contests, for example), I just think that older members would have more to offer ...and by older I mean both from the 'original' members (their insight is valuable, in my opinion and no, it has nothing to do with myself being one of those) and from the 'newer' members like Adam, Nick, James, Juli (and anyone else I forget ) who may be 'newer' but have proven their interest both in the site and in the contest.