It doesn't matter what your position or anyone elses is

[Jamon Camisso]

billt-lxSQFCZeNF4 at public.gmane.org wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 10:31:03AM -0500, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> 
>>billt-lxSQFCZeNF4 at public.gmane.org wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It doesn't matter what your position or anyone elses is.
>>>
>>
>>While I don't question the accuracy of Bill's assertion, I wonder 
>>whether it's a helpful attitude, coming out of an organization that is 
>>(at least superficially) trying to attract members, volunteers and 
>>possibly sponsors.
>>
> 
> Seeing I am no longer a member of the board, and have no official role in GTALUG executive I see no reason why I should limit my opinions to that of the board.
> 
> In reality every time this conversation occurs there is five or six people that believe me when I say that the best way to change TLUG to is to volunteer and make there voices known to the people that run this club that something is wrong and that they are willing to fix it.
> 
> The wiki for TLUG resulted because Sy read the thread about incorporation that was being banted around in August and September and contacted me about setting up a wiki for TLUG. Several companies approached us as sponsors based on these discussion. 
> 
> The reality is that GTALUG is democratic, it does foster an air of debate and discussion even about its very existence. The strength of this organization is the people that support it. Not the ones that don't.
> 

A democratic nature is all well and good -- but to what end? What is the use to 
the community at large? Apart from a functioning mailing list and wiki (both of 
which I don't discredit as useless by any means), how would things be any 
different with any of the various approaches to people management? How can 
GTALUG's democratic nature be put to some use that the people who are non-paying 
members can see, understand, and be motivated to join by (such being the 
apparent?) mandate at the moment.

>>Obviously credibility isn't being sought.
> 
> 
> We arleady have credibility. You may not believe it but the people and organization that we speak to do.
> 

Credibility amongst members should be first and foremost to any community 
organization. Instead we have a repeating acrimonious debate a few times a year. 
This partisanship ("a firm adherent to a party , faction, cause, or person; 
especially : one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance" from 
m-w dictionary) is precisely the reason that I am not a member. If management of 
members was a priority and there was something to be gained by joining I would 
in a second.

But to play the otherside, why stop at the credibility that GTALUG has now? 
Surely a more informed and unified body of members could lend that much more 
credibility to whatever end it is being directed. To be able to state almost 
unequivocally that there 1000 potential members of "The LUG" who could be 
involved in whatever it is that needs credibility cannot but help with whatever 
goal(s) there are or will be in the future.

>>It's already been stated that GTALUG membership is less than 10% of the 
>>TLUG community. It's probably a _lot_ less than 10%. And given the above 
>>slogan for the current membership drive, it's not likely to grow much 
>>either.
> 

With the 1000 or so current members to whatever constitutes the TLUG? community, 
$20 a piece would add up rather quickly if everyone chipped in knowing that they 
were contributing to something specific or tangible. $20k per year could go a 
long way if there were some common goal shared by all.

> 
>>The only opportunity for GTALUG to build membership will be at a 
>>something like LinuxWorld, where people who simply want to "support the 
>>community" might join without knowing the situation.
>>
> 
> And this is bad? At least these people are supporting the community.
>   

I'd be happy to pay $20 a year and have it put to use by an incorporated LUG but 
I'd want to have a reason first. I can't imagine that to simply give $20 to an 
unknown entity would make most people feel all warm and fuzzy like. I don't 
think that an "if you build it they will come" attitude is necessarily the most 
effective way to go about organizing resources and people.

While ideals and good ideas are necessary in the beginning of any project, 
company, organization etc., there is no GTALUG effort that I am aware of 
directly promoting, fostering, and maintaining Linux in the Toronto area. That 
being said, I have no idea as to how much work goes on in the background by 
board members. But then, I suppose that that just supports my point that there 
is no leadership by example that I am aware of. If I am simply naive and unaware 
because I'm not involved enough, that too supports my point that there is a 
definitive lack of profile. People will not simply join for altruistic reasons 
(else I'd already have paid up), they need motivation, something very much 
missing around these parts.

>>>Presently GTALUG runs this mailing list and runs the club.
>>>
>>
>>The conspiracy theorist in people might wonder whether the whole point 
>>of this exercise is to ultimately funnel membership funds into the hands 
>>of those who "run the club", to one day generate profit for the 
>>subcontracted provision of resources that are currently volunteered. 
>>Since no other purpose has been offered for the money collected, and the 
>>management of said resources is *the* key stated function of GTALUG, 
>>it's not inconceivable. Furthermore, since we don't even have access to 
>>the bylaws online, we don't know what safeguards if any exist to prevent 
>>this from happening. I for one certainly hope that such bylaw safeguards 
>>exist, in which case such a theory would be moot.
>>
> 
> I believe that it was stated in another post by someone else who came to the executive meeting that he was convinced the accounting for the club was accurate. I'm not going to say he is any more honest than anyone else.
> 
> But consider the simple fact that the general meeting in September was open to anyone who wished to show up, and at that meeting there was photocopies of all of this years expenditures for anyone to take and scrutinize.
> 
> The reality is that this club is run by honest people who have nothing to hide. I don't believe anyone on this list has questioned any of the ongoing operation of TLUG. The only thing that has ever been debated is the policies.
> 
> As for the By-Laws, Chris Johnson is working on putting them online. The best thing to do is pester him.
> 
> Bill

All well and good to have bylaws, but again, to what end? Instead of focusing 
GTALUG's resources inwardly on the organization, establishing it and then 
seeking members, why not target those who aren't members first and get them to 
help organize the organization? In fact, why not put the current bylaws (draft 
or otherwise) up for all to see, debate, and modify/agree upon until all are 
happy? This would put all those 10% who've paid membership dues out to no small 
degree I'm sure -- but as a show of good faith to everyone else? I don't 
particulary think that a pay-to-play style of democracy is effective, and can't 
even see why it should be called such.

Jamon
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml