> >   Does that make sense?

Zephyr and all:

I am a team player, so this will be my last post on the hosting subject
unless it is reopened by the group ... I will continue to work for Governor
Dean under whatever circumstances I am handed ...

But, since you ask, NO, the decisions that you outlined, in my experience,
do not make sense ... so please file this under 'minority report' ...

I have followed the progress of this project closely, and I have to say, I
have watched the people doing the coding take the high road at every fork,
in order to build the best possible services ... now it seems to me that the
long term effectiveness of the project is being put at risk by turnouts to
some expedient detours instead of committing time and manpower needed to
keep
the project on the high road ... to finding solutions for some irritating,
but solvable, financial and legal issues  that need to be addressed ...

>From the beginning, the goals of this project have been described as
'inclusive not exclusive' ... a project to empower the average person who
wants to promote the Governor's interests by building a website ... my
experience in working with dozens - if not hundreds - of novice web masters
since 1995, tells me that anything short of a turnkey solution will reduce
the number of webmasters who will actually make good use of these services
to a small fraction of the project's potential ...

And, I am also concerned about what is going to happen in the Fall when a
lot of the individuals involved with this project are back in classes ... if
setting up the use of these services does not involve turnkey solutions with
automated setups at a known, trusted host who is contractually committed to
maintaining the integrity of the overall network, who is going to do all the
tweaking of the system and all the individual nodes?

If that happens, I believe that we will be left with a great set of tools
that few
will end up using effectively ... and an exclusive - not inclusive -
community
of nodes ...

Howard2







Howard Vicini
computer graphics, prepress, animation & web design
San Francisco

Dean url www.bayarea4dean.com
personal url www.vicini.net
email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yahoo IM howardvicini
AIM IM howardvicini
voice 415-522-1555

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Zephyr Teachout" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Howard Vicini'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Jon Lebkowsky'"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 2:43 PM
Subject: RE: [hackers] node hosting


> There are two primary different hosting questions, as I see it:
>
> (1) Where will we send people to host their own Dean Community Sites.
> Our current position on this is that we do not send them anywhere. We
> leave it up to the volunteer administrators to recommend hosting
> services, with some suggested guidelines. The more involved we get in
> the hosting decisions of the sites, the fuzzier the line between the
> campaign and the unofficial community sites. Furthermore, we don't want
> vendors fighting and calling the campaign all the time to be on the
> "recommended" list.
>
> (2) Where we host the Visible Volunteer Network. This is a DFA decision
> -- would love suggestions but likely use Rackspace or something, once
> our requirements are clear. I've asked that we have server space by this
> weekend, but we should at least have funding for it by that point.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> Zephyr
>
>
>
> How does everyone feel about an IRC meeting specific to the hosting
> issues
> so that everyone can catch up on what everyone else is doing ...
>
>
> Until I see a very specific spec sheet, I am very nervous about the
> outcome
> of anyone's efforts, including my own ...
>
> This is such an important project, for this Presidential election and
> future
> elections, in general, that I don't think anything should be done off
> the
> cuff ...
>
> *    Financing issues are one thing, of course ... we will eventually
> get
> clear guidelines from the campaign staff ... and 'banking' arrangements
> for
> ongoing expenses that are within the FEC rules ... these are standard
> concerns that will get worked out ...
>
> *    Technical specs seem to pretty well defined now, but I have not
> seen an
> approved, written spec sheet ... anyone have something?
>
> *    I believe that we can gain valuable insight on traffic and volume
> issues by sampling current Dean websites that have been online for a
> while
> in order to develop realistic guidelines that will be imprecise, but
> better
> than a guess, at least ...
>
> But there are also other requirements that we must define before
> selecting
> any host:
>
>     -is the host's building secure from intrusion ... what level of
> security
> do they maintain?
>     -does it have fire suppression... what type of structure?
>     -does the host have emergency, internal power generation
> capabilities?
>     -what records does the host make available concerning its uptime?
>     -how do current customers rate the host?
>     -what is the ownership's Party affiliation?
>
> And, a spec sheet covering all of these requirements should be developed
> before any 'shopping' for a host is done, even an internal one ... it is
> a
> standard corporate procedure that should be followed, I believe, for the
> obvious reasons ... and everything should be done in written, contract
> form
> ... thoughts?
>
>
> Howard Vicini
> computer graphics, prepress, animation & web design
> San Francisco
>
> Dean url www.bayarea4dean.com
> personal url www.vicini.net
> email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Yahoo IM howardvicini
> AIM IM howardvicini
> voice 415-522-1555
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jon Lebkowsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Howard Vicini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 1:08 PM
> Subject: RE: [hackers] node hosting
>
>
> > > How about CMR, Aldon and I work on finding out what options we have
> for
> > > hosting ... not to commit to anything, but to have our options fully
> known
> > > when the time comes ...
> >
> > We were already working on that, but feel free to jump in. Our
> original
> > thought was to host pro bono but when Jeff saw the requirements, he
> was a
> > little concerned about the potential bandwidth and other technical
> issues.
> > We were researching to see what other options exist to fit the
> requirements.
> > Jeff is at [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you want to contact him directly (but I
> think
> > he's on the list, as [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
> >
> > ~ jon
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>


Reply via email to