Well, a few points need to be clarified here. Icould have continued on
an old thread, but there were a lot of questions that needed answering,
so I decided to start afresh.Not that I havent said this before, but
I'll say this again:-
1. The choice of Heritage as a venue didnt really make me very happy,
for the following reasons:-
i)It was too big to have any sort of constructive discussions
amongst ourselves
ii) It was too obscurely located
iii) There was a great chance of being outnumbered by newbies.
2. We didnt have a choice, however because:
i)We had to start searching for a meet venue a week before the
date of the meeting
ii) We didnt have the resources to get hold of LCD Projectors,
PCs and white screens that were announced as requirements for
the Feb 2003 meeting that ultimately didnt materialize.
Heritage was one venue that provided us all this.
iii) We were to expect around 40-60 members in attendance at
the meet, which eventually wasnt the real number. We now find
ourselves in a **Catch 22** situation because we dont know
whether we should have meet venue for 60 people, or for 20
people.
3. Tech Content was necessary because:-
i) Many members had voiced this as a requirement in meetings.
ii) Heritage would have allowed us to have the meet only if it
could,in some way be beneficial to their students as everyone
would and should realise.
4. Now there will be some complaints:-
i) **Hardware was not good enough.**---Fair call. But can
beggars be choosers? We got the same stuff for COMPASS right ?
Cant expect someone to setup machines a night before a meet can
u?
ii) **Tech Content was too much** --It wouldnt have been too
much if there hadnt been so many **lamers** around the place.We
would have finished in time to have our own discussions. It
wasnt within our control. However, I take the responsibility for
this lapse.
iii) **We were asked to leave earlier than 6:30 PM** -- We were
initially told by Mr PC Ghosh that we could stay till 6:30 PM.
Now being the host, if he goes back on his word, there aint much
anyone can do about it right? However, I'll take this
responsibility too.
iv) **Lack of coordination**-- If I remember right, I had
invited all eager members of the LUG to come with me to
negotiate the meet venue when I first visited HIT. Anirban and
Anindya were the only people to respond. Even when the meet was
announced, I had tried my level best to express my own views and
reservations on the venue, and had tried to ask everyone their
queries/feedback etc. I did the best I could to keep everyone
informed and I wouldnt agree on the count that it wasnt well
coordinated.
5. The meeting was supposed to be a meeting. The letter which I gave to
Mr PC Ghosh containing our Agenda, clearly mentioned the word meeting.
If he reads between the lines to understand seminar when black and white
says otherwise, I think neither me, nor the LUG can be held to the
sword. We were informal in arranging the meeting, because we didnt have
a seminar in mind.
Having said all this I would like to add that this kind of a **fiasco**
(if that is what someone would like to call it) occurs when all
responsibilities of a LUG are shouldered by a single **individual**.
Which is why, when that particular individual is conspicuous by his
absence, others find it difficult to take on the mantle, even
temporarily. Which is why I find it strange, that there aren't more
**senior members** that take up certain responsibilities by rotation.
There usually is just one owner/list admin/webmaster for any LUG 'cos
that is a specialised job. But there always is a group of moderators
that keeps getting rotated/reshuffled after a reasonable period of time.
We all have our lives outside the LUG and there are times when we really
cant make time for the LUG. It is at such times that the show should go
on in spite of the absence of certain individuals. And that can happen
only if we start delegating responsibilities and those responsibilities
dont become the sole preserve of a certain set of people.
It is great for a few smart alecs to complain about the quality of the
meet and it isnt something anyone of us would not acknowledge. However,
I wish the suggestions/brickbats/flames came when we actually asked for
them, prior to the meet. Critics are our best friends as long as it
turns out to be constructive criticism. However, as far as I am
concerned, critics that are "no mail" members will find their criticism
> /dev/null . If Ranjabati or whatever has a few flames to hurl...do
that on the list. Its easy to say something on the site and get away
with it. I guess there will be a lot of answers waiting on the list.
The bottomline (if I can be allowed to underscore one) is that we need a
group of moderators that take up responsibilities by rotation and are
reshuffled over a period of time. We also need a small venue, limited
tech content for our meets and a slightly more proactive attitude
towards meeting in real life from all our members, to make our physical
existence credible.
/Sumeet
PS I could afford a venue at Barrackpore for the LUG for the month of
May and thereon. The venue can make 30 people comfortable. I am aware of
the fact that we wont have computers available and it may become too far
a location to access for most of our members. However I would like your
feedback on this.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sumeet Madhukar Moghe | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
C/O Mr PK Das, Ghola C Block, | Phone:+ 91 - 33 - 2595 1420
Opposite Checkpost, Sodepur, | + 91 - 33 - 2565 7575
Calcutta 700 110 - INDIA |
Download PGP Pub Key http://www.geocities.com/flame_boy_81/pubkey.zip
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are always doing something marginal when the boss drops by your
desk.
--
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the body
"unsubscribe ilug-cal" and an empty subject line.
FAQ: http://www.ilug-cal.org/node.php?id=3
