Simon, First, no hurt feelings here, I think I understand what you're saying.
What you're really saying is that we should show a diversity in experience and encourage the new people to come out. And that's something I'm absolutely for. ;) --R On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 17:23 -0400, Simón Ruiz wrote: > On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Vern Ceder > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I wish you well - anything that furthers the cause is all to the good. > > > > OTOH, I am a little troubled by the implication that anyone who knows shell > > scripting can't be trusted to talk to little old ladies without scaring them > > with long discourses about hash tables in bash. I'm not sure how you intend > > to make sure that innocents don't accidentally come into contact with > > geeks, but the whole idea seems a tad divisive to me. > > > > As to Rob's hash tables, in all the years I've known him, he never mentioned > > it before, and in fact it IS a cool geek trick that was directly related to > > the topic. To suggest he would talk about that to a newbie does a disservice > > to him and ignores the time he has spent patiently (and non-threateningly) > > working with newbies at our installfests and meetings. > > > > I guess I would rather see something where we showed people that in the Open > > Source community both the experienced and the inexperienced work together, > > and that if you need more technical expertise, it's available without any > > stigma. > > > > Just a thought from a geek... > > > > Cheers, > > Vern > > > > Vern, > > I don't disagree with anything you say. > > > > > I suppose it's just been sharply brought to my attention lately how > intimidating geeks are to people who just don't care. > > It was not my intention to be divisive or exclusive, and my idea is > *definitely not* that we need to insulate "the beginners" from "the > geeks". > > My intention was to emphasize the magnitude of the intimidation > problem through hyperbole. Unfortunately, hyperbole is a rather > industrial strength tool that should not be wielded right before bed. > I definitely should have read the safety warnings BEFORE flipping the > switch to "on". > > It was not my intention to say or even imply that Rob is > uber-intimidating to people because if they're not careful he'll vomit > shell scripting on them like some weird form of Geek Tourette's; It > was just a badly-formed attempt at bringing levity to my very serious > concern. > > > > > * Rob, please forgive me; it was wrong of me to say what I did. * > > > > > My point is that all of us are intimidating when we have our geek hats > on and even more so in a group, and since it seems we all wear our > geek hats at FWLUG events, beginners are intimidated to approach us. > > As an example, last night's meeting was advertised with the sentence > "If you've never moved beyond the point and click world of the GUI, > but want to see what's under the hood, this is [the] meeting for you." > > Now I personally thoroughly enjoyed the meeting and got a lot out of > it. This is the sort of stuff I dig. I'm a geek. > > However, I strongly feel that we irresponsibly advertised a geekfest > as being a beginner-friendly introduction. > > It's important that we seriously consider what effect this has on the > beginners who show up, their perception of the FWLUG in specific, and > of Linux and Free Software in general. > > Let's use my wife, who came in understandably expecting a > beginner-friendly presentation, as an example. Bash dictionaries were > merely the last thing discussed; I know Sarah—who was hoping to learn > something, and even had a terminal window up in anticipation—was lost > almost immediately after the meeting started. > > In fact, the very degree of difference between what we advertised and > what we delivered last night is what inspired my ill-fated attempt at > communicating that this is precisely the sort of thing we want to > avoid with our event. > > > > > Now, with regard to the particular (and particularly miswielded) > hyperbole I made using Rob's name in vain, that you're referring to: > > I think it's perfectly fair to say that even geeks who aren't actively > wearing their geek hats are still going to be more intimidating to the > uninitiated than non-geeks. > > I want to avoid this intimidation as much as humanly possible in an > event targeted at pre-beginners. > > This is is why I feel it's important that the "face" of this event—the > speakers and booth manners and such—should primarily be non-geeks, not > because I feel geeks should be excluded in any way. > > I'm eager to discuss this matter as well as any other related to the > event, so... > > > > > I think, Vern, that you make an excellent point about wanting to > demonstrate the variety of technical experience in the community and > the lack of stigma attached to one's geekyness or newbieness. > > I wholeheartedly agree. This is what I was driving at by emphasizing a > need for non-geeks to get involved. > > Think about it: if someone were to judge us by the people who > typically show up to our "Real Life" events, does this diversity of > technical expertise you're talking about representing exist? > > What percentage of those of us who show up regularly have never opened > up a terminal? never written a program or script? How does that > compare to the overall community of Free Software users? > > With that in mind, I wanted to make sure the beginners out there in > mailing list land know that I'm talking to them and not just to the > core group of people that shows up to our events. > > (Yes, you, who's been thinking "Yeah I use Linux, but I wouldn't > really have anything to talk about at these meetings—they're over my > head—so I don't go." This is the time to come out of the woodwork for > a "Real Life" event. We want you. We need you.) > > I didn't emphasize our need for geeks because geeks are always needed, > and they're always there. I suppose I took us for granted and now, > through the miracle of modern retrospect, I can see my mistake. > > > > > Please forgive my thoughtless phrasing. > > I hope I've done a fair job or re-iterating my point stripped of the > offensive rhetoric. > > > > > Vern, thank you for calling me on the tone of my original post. > > It wasn't my intention to come off like that and I would not have > given it a second thought without that wake up call. > > Simón > > _______________________________________________ > Fwlug mailing list > [email protected] > http://fortwaynelug.org/mailman/listinfo/fwlug_fortwaynelug.org _______________________________________________ Fwlug mailing list [email protected] http://fortwaynelug.org/mailman/listinfo/fwlug_fortwaynelug.org
