Hail Vaguers:
Interesting thread by my measurement:
(wc -c orig.post > 140 ) { interest++; }
(wc -w reply.post > wc -w orig.post) { interest ++; }
Looking through years worth of past posts, the usual fare is short observations
warranting short responses. Sometimes, real conversations get started that lead
somewhere; but as exception to the rule.
This indicates to me that vague is used mostly just to 'say Hi and stay in the
loop'; and maybe ask/answer a ? or 2
if it does not require lengthy investment in words.
What makes this thread interesting to me (thanks JSled) is that it addresses
our existentialism vis-a-vis
how we identify ourselves and where incentivization lies in the belonging.
In asking about "VAGUE", Josh asks, I think, where our values lie, both within
our group and relative to the Public Domain.
We, presumably, enjoy the company we keep here; but how has that translated
itself over the years? Is random pres and
chit-chat over beers enough to be sustainable? We have common-ground, even
while possibly having competing interests.
(Has anyone herefound a job or directly collaborated with other members in
ways that have resulted in improving economic viability, for instance?)
Camps have been demarcated between "advocates" and "hacker-space";
internal-vs-external for some time, in trying to
answer the "what are we about" ? over the years. I know that for me, is is all
about <b>opensource</b>. period.
Without FLOSS, i would not be computing, would not have the ability to do what
i want. I think many would concur, despite
not necessarily being overtly involved in its propagation.
This is because we, ourVAGUEselves, are so specialized that regardless of
overlap, we probably do not uses each others' tools
despite our interest in them. JSled does JUnit test, RBennet makes SIP boxen,
someone else does EMR or GIS mapping, whatever.
Our internal diversity means that however interesting a presentation on
Rosegarden may be, the likelihood of members racing going home and using
it enough to hurdle the curves is pretty low; compared to, say, a pres for
composers/arrangers, musicians, etc.. who most certainly
have analog tools, and may be interested enough in switching as to actually use
and maybe adopt it.
I realize, after spending some time promoting the concept of VOSSE, that
blowing the 'advocate' horn strikes some people as so much
noise pollution. Not to appear all "henny-penny", but for anyone following /.
or techdirt on the horror stories of recent note
related to IntellectualProperty, Copyright and Trademark Infringement, etc...
the drive to control and filter the 'net, to remove
choice from the enduser, to legislate or treatise (ACTA) devices that empower
old-media and hollywood at the cost of the Public Domain:
With that in mind, and as a direct counter-action, I propose "Random Acts of
Opensource" as a possible remedy for both the
long-term viability of both our group and the environment we've labored hard to
make. That is what the stakes are for me.
It may be (less) hard to wrap ones mind around the possibility, however
distant, that
if FLOSS does not gain greater mind-share in the public-eye that we, or our
hacking successors, may lose the greater and best parts of it
to the fear-mongering corporatists ("Opensource enables pedo and terrorists.
RMS is the devil. Geist is a dark prince, we coders are all
henchmen and pirates." A few short years ago I would have laughed at the
absurdity, now I can provide the quotes verbatim.
As rob mehner insightfully points out: answers are everywhere, .com's pay
(cheaply) for ppl to write them (how2.com, ehow...)
Locality (the "taste of place") has no special meaning in this regard and this
listserv is often not the most suitable forum to
get answers to many of our technical ?'s ; which makes VAGUE's
value-proposition one of locality and proximity.
So for me, it boils down to whether VAGUE will remain a walled-garden for its
members to 'hang-out' or will it serve some
definitive role in trying to ensure the survival of the platform(S) upon which
it bases its' existence;
either effective advocacy or "'Yar matey, we're all pirates on this boat."
Happy coding, all.
Rion
On Friday 17 September 2010, Sam Hooker wrote:
> ----- Marc Farnum Rendino <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I think you've identified a problem (low activity) and a solution
> > state (new members), however:
> >
> > I believe that would take more than a name change.
> >
> > And the "more" is the critical part, not the name change. :)
>
> Agreed, to a large extent. As Josh and others point out, the only way a
> special-interest community survives is if there's, well, interest. If *we*
> want for there to be a regional group focused on [supertopic here], *we* need
> to either provide or provision* the content. This problem is neither unique
> to VAGUE nor technology UGs in general. There have been times when a small
> subset seemed juiced enough to consistently solicit (cajole, really)
> VAGUErants into making presos. Each time I've seen that happen, thought, it's
> quickly devolved into "Josh mobilizing the group AND the presenter". The
> coefficient of static friction on this crowd is amazing. ;-)
>
> * Don't forget that we could invite others in to do our dirty work!
>
> I don't mean to threadjack into a lovefest for jsled (however well-deserved
> such a thing may be); only to point out that communities crumble when they
> lean too heavily on a single person to muster all the energy and purpose.
> What happens when Josh finally throws up his hands and says, "To hell with
> you all"? We could rely on a string of Benevolent Cruise Directors to sustain
> our community, but there's no guarantee that the next one is waiting in the
> wings. There have always been "hot spots" of activity and chatter among the
> membership, for as long as I've been participating. This is natural and
> points the way toward something self-sustaining. We just need more than one
> guy who takes personal responsibility for the well-being of the organization
> to get closer to the sustainable ideal.
>
> > I suggest that the name change should be a side issue which doesn't
> > detract from the central point of increasing activity and attracting
> > new members.
>
> This is where I diverge from Marc, slightly. Language is powerful. A name
> that more-closely defines our shared vision for the group could go a long way
> toward 1) widening the current membership's imaginations, when it comes to
> developing ideas for pertinent content, and 2) broadening the base of new
> users finding us through [search engine of choice], who might otherwise pass
> us up as a bunch of suspenders-wearing graybeards stuck reminiscing about
> System V. (With apologies to the suspenders-wearing graybeards stuck
> reminiscing about System V among us.)
>
> I *do not* think, however, that discussion of a new focus for the group
> should distract from kicking off the 2010-2011 "VAGUE Season" with any of the
> fine presos that have been offered so far. (Or any others that may be lurking
> out there, waiting for the right moment. You know who you are: the same
> people they're always talking about on public radio during Pledge Drive,
> waiting to swoop in and save the day at the last minute with your
> contribution... :-))
>
> All that said, I can do something on federated identity management and web
> single-sign-on with Shibboleth[1], if there's interest.
>
>
> $0.02,
>
> -sth
>
> [1]http://shibboleth.internet2.edu
>
> sam hooker|[email protected]|http://www.noiseplant.com
> Sorte supernorum scriptor libri potiatur!
>
--
Best of luck (and I hope you don't need it)
email: riondluz_at_gmail.com
web: http://dluz.com/
AIM/Jabber/Google: riondluz
Phone: 802.644.2255
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/6/126/769
L I N U X .~.
Choice /V\
of a GNU /( )\
Generation ^^-^^
POSIX
RULES
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
