Re: [baseball-databank] ADMIN: BDB decision making process
- View SourceTangotiger wrote:
> I think this is a good idea. A couple of things comeI would love to have some debate for this. I certainly wasn't calling
> to mind:
> 1 - Is this something that is up to debate, and
> therefore, it's a little early to ask for nominations?
> Or, should we just go for it? Personally, I think we
> should go for it, but there should be room for others
> to put in their ideas as well.
for nominations. I was just proposing a method to the madness.
> 2 - 7 is better than 5, since this is a volunteerI agree, the proprietary issue should probably be the first issue dealt
> group, and we're not always around. If you are only
> 5, they'll be situations when only 2 or 3 people are
> 4 - I'm always concerned about conflicts of interest.
> Conflict of interest also means that the appearance of
> such should not exist.
> For example, almost everyone nominated has their own
> proprietary work somehow involved. Decisions could be
> made that negatively affects them, but is for the
> greater good. I'm not saying that people on the board
> will act with selfish motives (or with selfless
> motives), but, this is something that should be
> addressed up-front, so that this doesn't become an
with. Deciding upon a license and giving people of the option of
pulling out their work if it isn't acceptable might be the best way to
go. Then we start from that point and go forward for with a clear
Baseball Stats! http://www.Baseball-Reference.com/
- View SourceRegarding Sean Forman's structural proposal:
First off, I think that this is a great idea. The work I've been
doing with the next generation BDB has tailed off greatly since the
season began. I had imagined more interaction with the design
process and think that these administrative changes may help get more
feedback and something going. I support the proposal with 7
I think that everyone on the mailing list qualifies as non-technical
personnel. Non-technical issues (data integrity is how I'm
understanding that position) should require at least one other
researcher to confirm the data. If there are any conflicts, they
should be brought up on the list (which is similar to how it works now).
If it's accountability that we want with the non-technical members,
then it would really have to be based on expertise. KJOK has proven
to be knowledgeable in pretty much all fields, and would be a very
good person to check off the data for final approval. I would then
like to see those with experience in different areas (and/or eras) be
non-technical leads for them, also with final approval authority.
The only safeguard that should be in place is that one may not stamp
off one's own contributions.
I think that leaders in various fields will slowly emerge from the
mailing list as things come up. It's hard to take a top-down
approach (assign people to a post) to this part of the structure. A
bottom-up approach where people take responsibility where needed
Second, I accept nomination, and am flattered to be nominated despite
the lack of work on this lately. I think that more interaction in
the administrative process will help push me to work more.
Third, I second the other nominations made for technical leads. The
Baseball-Databank *is* the two Seans. Tangotiger has been the most
supportive of the work I've been doing on the next version, and has
come up with a number of great suggestions, as has KJOK. Wendt-san
has challenged me to think on a number of occasions, and would also
make a great member. He's also well in touch with the various SABR
committees and can act as liaison with them to assure that the BDB
doesn't go astray from common research goals. Derek Adair has
brought up a number of issues with the proposed solutions as well,
and would make a good technical lead. I think that covers everybody
so far, making six.
Public Key: http://www.japanesebaseball.com/keys/westbaystars.gpgkey
- View SourceI also want to make some clarificiations for my proposal. Anyone will
be able to propose changes/corrections to the db. The board will just
decide whether or not to include it into the db.
They will need to make a reasoned argument as to why to make the change,
but it is not like the the board that I am proposing are the ones doing
all the work and bottling up things that they don't want to see done.
Baseball Stats! http://www.Baseball-Reference.com/
- View SourceI'll also nominate Michael M, and Mike Crain.
As well, we should consider the board to not
necessarily be the same people. One board for data
quality and another for data structure. Possibly have
4 on both, with 3 separate on each (for a total of
10). This'll be useful for the eventual turnover (or
vacations), as the single-board members can fill in on
the other. Of, if you want to keep each board as 5
people, make it 3 duals, and 2 singles (for a total of
--- Sean Forman <sean-forman@...>
> I also want to make some clarificiations for my__________________________________
> proposal. Anyone will
> be able to propose changes/corrections to the db.
> The board will just
> decide whether or not to include it into the db.
> They will need to make a reasoned argument as to why
> to make the change,
> but it is not like the the board that I am proposing
> are the ones doing
> all the work and bottling up things that they don't
> want to see done.
> Sean Forman
> Baseball Stats! http://www.Baseball-Reference.com/
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
- View SourceI'd be quite interested in participating in this process.
I'm a mathematician and statistician who works for the Padres,
and I use PostgreSQL and Linux daily.
Building a comprehensive baseball database is non-trivial,
and my experience in doing so with the Padres might be