Mentoring Forum

[BMCS Dennis Endicott (Ret)]

The Deckplate discussion board for E-6 and below has been a dismal failure. However, I don't want to give up on the idea of having those junior personnel discuss things on a board like this.

I have an idea.

Would anyone object to opening a forum on this board in which E-6 and below Coasties could post? The idea would be to give them access to a large number of Chiefs for purposes of mentoring, general advice, and information gathering.

In fact, it may be a good idea to begin grooming promising E-6s that aren't necessarily up for promotion yet by giving them access to this board via that forum.

It would be set up so that they could post only to that forum. We, of course, would be able to reply.

What do you think?

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

I like the idea. I think it has protential to be more effective than other avenues available to them.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

It sounds like a good idea.

I'm assuming that they would register just like us and then only have access to their area?

[BMCS Dennis Endicott (Ret)]

Correct......

[BMCS Burt Ford]

I like the idea too.

[BMC Robert Ornelas]

I like the idea, but what about a seperate link to a different forum. Something they can get into, but keep them out of the mess forums. Also when they register it is (SN,FN,AN, BM3.... .. ... Gooblatz). I wouldn't like to see it get like the other site and the infamous THADBOY.

My two pence

Rob

[BMCM Bruce Bradley]

I like the idea too.

[MECS Scott Pugh]

Ditto, I know my MK1 has mentioned this site to me once or twice. I don't think he would be an avid poster, but at least we would give the E6 below another avenue - without the option of remaining anonymous.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott (Ret)]

Robert-
I don't know what you mean when you say "a separate link to a different forum." There was a completely separate board. It didn't get used.

I agree that they would need to sign on with their real names and be verified via global just as we do with ourselves.

[BMCM Ian McVicker]

Sounds good.

[YNCM Doug Squires (Ret)]

Let me understand ... we built them their own board and it was not used, so now you want them to use our board?

Why was it not used? What leads anyone to believe that simply granting them access to a different space on our board will make a difference?

[BMCS Dennis Endicott (Ret)]

There was no connection to the Chiefs on the other board. Membership was restricted to E-6 and below.

[ETC Joe Jester (Ret)]

The problem I see, with a mentoring forum, would be the willingness to write the discussion. Someone will surely misinterpet it, as we all are not wordsmiths, and the original poster would be getting calls from those who misinterpet ... swinging their rate or grade around like the child they are. Those in disagreement will do the same.

On the good side, it opens the opportunity for them to seek advise from a number of people via the Private Messages.

[BMCS Jeff Lucas]

I'm in. One vote in the Affirmative.

[BMC Robert Ornelas]

Senior

That is the way I ment it a seperate board.

When they type in WWW.CGCHIEFS.COM and go into Forums
There will be two links 1) Chiefs Call 2) E-6 and Below " "

Hope that clarifies it a bit:confused:

Rob

[ETC Joe Jester (Ret)]

No need for seperate links.

Right now there are a couple of groups [administrators, subscribers, members, and public]. Each of those groups have different access to these forums. These may not be the real names assigned, but will do for this posting.

Public has access to public rooms but no posting priviledges.

Members have access to all the public rooms and "The Room" with posting priviledges. They don't have access to CPO Mess.

Subscribers have all the rights of members plus access and posting priviledges to the CPO Mess.

Dennis is thinking of making the E6 and Below area, right here on this forum. They would have access to all public threads here plus posting in the E-6 & Below area. That would also allow all the members and subscribers here to access those areas.

Administrators are a different ballgame with alot of priviledges.

I think it's a good idea.

[ETCS John Zidek]

My 2, Take them or leave them.

I like the idea of E-6s (Active Duty) being granted Posting abilities to a board. Call it whatever you want, but I will look at it as a way to help groom Future Chiefs. Give them Advice, Guidance, tips and pitfall warnings. It is an easy way for them to have access to a ton of wisdom. LMAO just realized our membership has ..... what a 1000 Years of experience as E7s and above? ok ok maybe 1000 is a slight exaggeration, but the point is there.


Now the reason I dont think the E5 and below should have posting abilities.

The E5 and below should be getting all of that from their E-6s. If the E-6s can't help them, then we will be here to aid the E-6s so they can. I am looking at it as a chain of command / lowest level type of thing.

Does that make sense?


Another thought:
I know if I am on here one day and I see a post from one of my guys asking for your help, my first thought will be, Why didnt they just ask me?? That thought may sound like I am __________ (insert your choice of words), but isnt that what I am here for? Isn't that what my E6s are here for?

This could get very interesting.

Maybe it will help us stay a little more focused on what is going on in the lives of our people. Make us notice the things that we should be noticing.

So here is my vote.

Yes to E-6s
No to E5 and below.

ETC "Z"

[ETC Joe Jester (Ret)]

John,

It certainly would wake some up, wondering why they were so unapproachable.

[ETCS John Zidek]

Exactly what I meant

[BMCS Dennis Endicott (Ret)]

John-
You made a good point about excluding E-5 and below.
In regards to your other point, that may indeed present a problem even for the E-6s.

[ETC Joe Jester (Ret)]

John,

If their disposition was such that their charges went elsewhere to seek advise ... the problem isn't with them. Only with their expose' per se' did the perception of unapproachablility came to light.

On a positive note ... everyone would be looking to improve their actions a little to squelch that perception. :D

When one is the target of the discussion, it's easy to see why they don't want to tell the target.

Naturally one must keep an eye open for those accounts that are based on paygrade prospective. Sometimes the juniors don't have the big picture.

They might be running their E-7 mouth backed up by their E-4 a$$. That would prove disasterous for their wallet. :D

[BMC John Phillips III]

I agree with John Zidek.

If anything Dennis a good idea might be continuing with the Deck Plate forum as is, perhaps granting some of us mentoring status on that board. You could give all of us or a small number of volunteers permission to post in the Deck Plate Forum. Or just granting access to paying member$ - might actually recruit more members.

What do you think?

The only other thing I would be concerned with is pulling junior personnel away from the CGCentral boards.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott (Ret)]

That's a good idea, too. I could revamp the other discussion board to include the Chiefs as mentors.

[DCCS Brett Wickett]

I like the idea which ever way it goes.

[LTJG Brian Strattard (ETC)]

I would say no due to the fact that if the DECKPLATE forum and the intranet boards are not being used by our junior members, then I do not see this forum being used as well. The major downfall to the other two forums is that all users are identified, which would be the same here. The members should be using their COC for questions and a fall back to that should be the intranet forums. The intranet boards have the knowledge of all our active members as well as the knowledge of the rest of the service to pool from. That would be the correct place to have mentoring questions answered.

Then there are the costs. Would more users require more admin, memory, support? Would the cost for the paying members here go up, would all of the current members be required to pay dues, would the junior members be required to pay for their questions? If this did catch on for some reason, what would the effects on the costs to run the site be? If we did let junior members post, why not the officer corps? What would be the overhead to run a site accessed by the entire guard? These are also questions that would need to be considered...

Strat sends...

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

People who want answers to their questions are going to keep asking until someone gives them the answers they need.
I would rather those people came here, than sought out ill advice from a sea lawyer in the UPH.
For those supervisors than don't like that their people came here looking for advice? Be glad that they're still asking for advice from any source. Then work on creating an environment where they feel comfortable going to you first.

The problem I see with granting access for some Chiefs into the Deck Plate Forum is that they're opening themselves up to further scrutiny from those same supervisors.
An added benefit to keeping it all under one roof is that new conservations could emerge from old topics, and people wouldn't have to jump back and forth to try and keep up with the conversation.

I'm ex-Army, so if you were going to make a cut-off, I'd say E-5. If you're looking at someone who is thinking career Coast Guard, I think it really starts there.

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

Can the deckplate forum be "advertised" at the LAMS class? A school? Perhaps it is a lack of awareness.