On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 7:33 PM, Evan Pettrey <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Brandon Allbery <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Evan Pettrey <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> The conversation we've been having here is a great example of what I >>> mean: We've gotten so caught up on whether or not this thing should be >>> called a "chapter" or if a chapter is explicitly something else, that we've >>> killed a lot of the momentum behind something that has a lot of potential >>> to be something great. >> >> >> Seems to me we moved on from that several days ago and are now discussing >> how to do it in such a way that benefits both members and the goals of >> LOPSA. >> > > Agreed. Though I still believe it was a valid example of the concern. > I do not. The whole uproar was because the original proposer, and a number of other people piling on, took it as an attack on the concept instead of as a specific issue involving the bylaws; once that was clarified and people started thinking instead of blindly attacking, the problem was quickly resolved. Changes to bylaws will do nothing whatsoever about emotional mis-reactions. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates [email protected] [email protected] unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
