On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Brian Cluff
<brian@snaptek.com> wrote:
My answers are inline.
On 05/07/2013 10:28 AM, Lisa Kachold wrote:
* Make the barriers to LUG membership as low as possible.
* Make the LUG's Web site a priority: Keep all information current,
make it easy to find details about meetings (who, what, and where),
and make contact information and feedback mechanisms prominent.
* Install distributions for anyone who wants it.
* Post flyers, messages, or handbills wherever computer users are in
your area.
*** Secure dedicated leadership.
* Follow Linus Torvalds's /benevolent dictator/ model of leadership.
******* Take the big decisions to the members for a vote.
* Start a mailing list devoted to technical support and ask the
"gurus" to participate on it.
* Schedule a mixture of advanced and basic, formal and informal,
presentations.
* Support the software development efforts of your members.
*** Find way to raise money without dues: for instance, selling GNU/Linux merchandise to your members and to others.
*** Consider securing formal legal standing for the group, such as
incorporation or tax-exempt status.
* Find out if your meeting place is restricting growth of the LUG.
* Meet in conjunction with swap meets, computer shows, or other
community events where computer users -- i.e., potential GNU/Linux
users -- are likely to gather.
*(**** Elect formal leadership for the LUG as soon as practical: Some
helpful officers might include President, Treasurer, Secretary,
Meeting Host (general announcements, speaker introductions, opening
and closing remarks, etc.), Publicity Coordinator (handles Usenet
and e-mail postings, local publicity), and Program Coordinator
(organises and schedules speakers at LUG meetings).
While there are officers (well, maybe a President...), NONE have ever been ELECTED and instead consist of the SAME few people laughingly asked to be part of the vague (and as yet unidentified) members of the Steering Committee by Hans. Again, who are these people steers; where are they documented; what are their functions? Who have they been for the past 10 years? How were they selected?
****** Provide ways for members and others to give feedback about the
direction, goals, and strategies of the LUG.
Linux Administrator types have highly evolved systemic thinking and a great deal of experience with employment and management or organizational (and technical) systems that don't work. These types here in Phoenix leave rather than actively maintain any motivation in light of these blatant issues that equate to lack of growth. Sure, let's all "play" Open Source; but this excerpt is from an OLD Linux User Group post; it's directives were written for LUGs that worked. Those LUGs still exist in other large cities (smaller than Phoenix) with hundreds of active highly competent individuals (at the level of you and Hans and the LONG list of others who have left the PLUG due to these problems and for which there is NO OPEN FORUM to provide feedback about the direction, goals and strategies of the LUG.
* Support GNU/Linux and free software / open source development
efforts by donating Web space, a mailing list, or an ftp site.
* Establish an ftp/Web site for relevant software.
****** Archive everything the LUG does for the Web site.
This is where this discussion began. What tools are we planning to add to the website to provide for Social Media? How can be provide a list of presentations or an easy way to submit those files? I have it on my Drupal and Concrete5.org CMS's with moderator approval? Why do we, as code monkeys and integrators, not USE THE SOURCE?
* Solicit "door prizes" from GNU/Linux vendors, VARs, etc. to give
away at meetings.
* Give credit where due.
* Submit your LUG's information to all the LUG lists.
* Publicise your meetings on appropriate Usenet groups and in local
computer publications and newspapers.
* Compose promotional materials, like PostScript files, for instance,
members can use to help publicise the LUG at workplaces, bookstores,
computer stores, etc.
* Make sure you know what LUG members want the LUG to do.
* Release press releases to local media outlets about any unusual LUG
events like an Installation Fest, Net Day, etc.
* Use LUG resources and members to help local non-profit organisations
and schools with their Information Technology needs.
* Advocate the use of our OS enthusiastically but responsibly.
* Play to LUG members' strengths.
* Maintain good relations with vendors, VARs, developers, etc.
* Identify and contact consultants in your area.
* Network with the leaders of other LUGs in your area, state, region,
or country to share experiences, tricks, and resources.
* Keep LUG members advised on the state of software -- new kernels,
bugs, fixes, patches, security advisories -- and the state of the
GNU/Linux world at large -- new ports, trademark and licensing
issues, where Torvalds is living and working, etc.
* Notify the Linux Documentation Project -- and other pertinent
sources of GNU/Linux information -- about the documentation the LUG
produces: technical presentations, tutorials, local HOWTOs, etc.
HOW MANY ARE WE ACTUALLY SUCCESSFUL WITH? WHY?
We do all of these things... some are more successful than others of course. Some haven't been done in a while and should probably be done again. The one thing on there we don't have, and it's option on the list is having non-profit status. That is something we are still working on, but right now we don't really have a need for it. We have trouble right now getting people to help with even the basic things, I would hate to have a non-profit in the mix to spread the few people that do contribute even thinner.
I offered 3 times directly to Hans, as well as during an IRC planning session (loosly defined) to head up the 501-3c project, including submitting the legal paperwork myself, and ensuring it was complete. Hans declined. Others have similar experience with trying to volunteer for anything that changes the direction or structure from the small time faux LUG we keep small in this huge city of human open source resources.
I believe that the limitations in the PLUG are inherently due to the
limited structure, the professionals in Arizona, who tend to be
conservative, doing only what serves them. The PLUG at it's current
organization is limited and that limitation of structure and vision
limits our professional and greater open source community involvement.
The way we are organized isn't perfect, but it's not keeping us from getting stuff done either. The biggest problem we have isn't in not having a list of things to do, or someone to organize that list, it's in having people with time to actually DO what our grand plans are.
I believe this is incorrect, the problems are inherent with people not being managed (or having clear delegation or projects and planning session) by more than 2 people, you and Hans. Agile has clear organizational guidelines for "loose projects" that glaringly expose these truths (with our PLUG organization and delegation) for which our former Steering Committee member often lamented.
I can script or crontab a backup for the website that would allow more
than one or two people to maintain (read control) it. I can configure a
CMS that will allow submissions from community to be REVIEWED before
release. If this was not included in the new web build (also controlled
by 2 people - You and Hans) I would have to say why not?
You completely miss read what I said about the website. The plug website IS a CMS. It has PURPOSELY been limited to a select number of people who maintain it. They are limited to a select number of people who maintain it. The problem with getting content onto the website isn't the people that are maintaining the website. Those people have been very good as getting what info they have online in a timely manner.
Why can't everyone register and submit content, which is reviewed by someone who volunteers and is Accepted to an Internship, by an ELECTED membership?
Hans IS NOT one of the people with access to the website. He asked that he NOT be given access because he wanted to make sure that PLUG WAS NOT the Hans show.
<sic> Irrelevant and not correct.
My original statement stands. You keep throwing out accusations based on false assumptions. The fact that you asked who was on the steering committee shows that you don't show up to the PLUG meeting. The proof being that Hans introduces the steering committee at most meetings. He does that in the context of inviting the members to talk to the steering committee to help support plug in some way and to invite people to help us plan stuff.
If you can't immediately point me to a reference on the PLUG site with the list of officers and Steering Committee members, we have failed the basic precepts recommended by Linus, in place at other LUGs (and archived here:
http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/User-Group-HOWTO-6.html#ss6.3) and working well to support growth in other large cities.
Again who elects the officers (Hans)? Who determines the steering committee (Hans), what plug membership votes for projects (None)? Who determines who is assigned to those projects (Hans)? I call this limited management that can only grow as wide as that one available bandwidth.
Brian Cluff
Thanks for this open discussion. As always, it's a pleasure to play "devil's advocate". I appreciate the honor of your association.