On 10/12/05, Kevin D. Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyways, can somebody please just send an email to the list detailing > what the issue is? All I've gotten so far is a vague notion of > "bylaws".
Thanks for making my point for me, Kevin. :-) My initial reaction, when I was brought into the discussion, was "Whoa! Last I heard, we were looking into the matter; now we're talking about submitting bylaws for approval! What's going on?!?" To some extent, this is my fault. We've had this discussion so many times before, only to see nothing concrete come of it, that I never expected things to move so fast. A bad, and disrespectful, assumption on my part. Otherwise, I would have brought up the idea of a "full disclosure" policy much earlier. Apparently, a lot of work was going on "behind the scenes", so to speak. I don't think that was done in an effort to hide anything. Indeed, I suspect everyone involved had the best of intentions, in "sparing everyone else the boring details". My fundamental concern here is that these proceedings should be as public as possible. Since there is apparently a cabal, and I'm apparently a member, and *I* was caught off-guard by this, I have to assume that those *not* in the cabal could reasonably see this as a "power grab" by a self-appointed few. I want to state again, since people keep defending their actions: ** I DO NOT THINK THAT ANYONE WAS OR IS TRYING TO HIDE ANYTHING, OR ACTUALLY TRYING TO GRAB POWER! ** :-) My concern here is with perception, protocol, and principle. I am afraid others may *perceive* this as a power grab. I believe, on principle, our protocol should be to make everything as public as possible. I think the very fact that this teapot tempest is occurring is evidence that we have not done as good as job as we could on that point. I am trying to see things from the standpoint of "Joe User". Joe lurks on the -discuss list, posts once in a great while, and attends local meetings semi-regularly. Joe is not an activist, so Joe doesn't read the -org list, or monitor the "Organizational" TWiki Web for changes. So if we just jump onto the -announce list with "Hey everyone, here are some proposed bylaws for the new GNHLUG Inc", what is Joe User going to think? I am aware of the minutes posted on the website in the SummerSummit2005Notes topic. I am aware of the GNHLUGNonProfit topic. I do not believe that Joe User even knows those topics exist. Some of this is a technology problem. We've got websites, mailing lists, meatspace meetings, and private email. It's hard (if not impossible) to find someone who is connected to all of that, all of the time. Ideally, all the organizing done would be copied to the -org list, announced in person at meetings, *and* posted to the website, all as soon as it happens. Obviously, that's not feasible, but we need to keep the problem in mind. In terms of constructive advice, I suggest the following: Email discussions regarding GNHLUG organization should always happen on the -org list. Email is already involved, so this should require zero extra effort on the part of the discussers (is that a word?). The benefits are that a public record is automatically established and anyone who can and wants to help (and is sub'ed to the -org list) is automatically given the opportunity to do so. The only potential downside is that people not interested in the discussion at hand have to delete some extra mail. Personally, I consider that an acceptable cost. If you disagree, please speak up -- on the -org list, of course. ;-) We should make announcements that we are considering an effort to formally incorporate GNHLUG as a non-profit organization. The announcement should include a brief overview of why we think it's a good idea and what it will entail, a pointer to the website for more information, and an invitation for feedback. The website topics should include all the details (proposed bylaws, fees, responsibilities, etc.), and invite anyone interested to get involved (via -org list, seasonal summits, whatever). We should emphasize that this is merely in the *proposal* stage and that it ultimately comes down to what the membership wants. We should probably mention that a vote will be taken before any official action occurs. We should also emphasize that we encourage involvement and feedback. In particular, we should make sure people any objections get heard, early. These announcements should be made on the -announce list, on the GNHLUG website home page, and at all the local chapter meetings. I would request that local LUG websites also put a note up on their home pages. -- Ben _______________________________________________ gnhlug-org mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
