[NTLUG:Discuss] Re: GMail Invites
Bryan J. Smith
b.j.smith at ieee.org
Tue Aug 31 10:06:54 CDT 2004
On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 09:55, MadHat wrote:
> Oh and yes, he did unsubscribe. That was not my intention.
People unsubscribe because they get frustrated. Let them go, don't
think another thing about it. I normally don't take things personally.
You just caught me at a bad time prior, and I took it the wrong way. It
happens, forget about it. I apologized, not that it excuses it, but I
admit 100% guilt and humiliation.
If people want happy, joyous LUGs, then they will be little more than
people networking lists. We've got plenty of those in the Windows
world. LUG lists by their very nature are very technical, and something
that can become heated. Otherwise, not much will get accomplished. Of
course a LUG can _always_ create a separate "people networking" list
with low volume and high moderation, so there is _always_ that option in
addition to the main, technical list.
It was true when USL and BSD guys used to go at each other, and
themselves, on the ARPANET. It was true in the '80s in the GNU UseNet
groups. It was true when Linux was first developed and even now on the
LKML today. Linus can be a serious flammer -- but does that make him
"bad?"
The key to a successful LUG is that it does _not_ become the "cult of
personality." I know. In Orlando, I tried to keep an older LUG alive
back in 1999-2000. But all I did was end up moving the "cult of
personality" from the previous maintainer to myself. The new LUG was
formed to avoid that, but it took me 18 months to realize that. Largely
because I didn't approve of the way the new LUG was introduced, but
that's beside the point, I finally realized I was wrong.
What we have in LEAP is a series of checks'n balances, with very
reserved enforcement. People are free to say what they want as
individuals, but the group only acts with the utmost reservation for
legal (as well as general) issues of avoiding setting any precedent. It
is extremely rare that anyone tries to manipulate the system. We've
only had one officer who did otherwise (to me and a select group of
others, so I'm being biased since you're only hearing 1 side), but after
awhile, "people came around" and realized what was going on.
Ironically, he was one of founders. But now he has forked off and now
created his own "cult of personality" -- not realizing that he helped
write the same by laws that he is now complaining about. By laws
designed to prevent people from trying to do what the founder of ELUG
did, what I did with ELUG once I took control and what he had done as
President of that LUG, etc... The key is to _prevent_ 1-3 people to
exert their will on the group, by putting enough in place with by laws.
It just works, because there will _always_ be someone that intervenes.
I can say this because I made the same mistake.
That's why I believe in my LUG, even though sometimes the gauntlet comes
down on me. I know it is done with due process -- with one exception
(same "circular reference" that same person uses over and over ;-).
Somewhere along the line, my "colleague" (I call him that because I,
among select other LEAPsters, consistently "bail him out" of projects
because he overstates what he knows) forgot. It's his loss, and now he
is only alienating people -- just like I did when I tried to keep the
old LUG alive.
Now this is where that part** ends. People will conflict. People will
differ. People won't always be civil. And people like to blame. The
most you'll ever see me do is blame a "situation" or "selection of
people" and _not_ one person. God knows I'm abbrassive in e-mail, so
I'm very guilty myself. I don't start things, but I often end them in
the wrong way.
95% of any group will put up with the other 5% that sometimes hurt the
group. I know I'm in that latter 5%. But you won't see me being
hypocritical on blame. I know I'm a part of it. Some of the people
that complain the most are those that are in that same 5%, pointing
fingers at others in the 5%. The 95% don't care, they just want a LUG
list.
-- Bryan
**NOTE: The other part is taking it to the extreme. Forget the fact
that he informed the FBI that I hacked a server where his stuff is
located (thank God he made the same statement publicly, which made it
pretty much proved how biased it was), and other things, he's started to
threaten LEAP with legal action over things that have nothing to do with
the group. As long as no one stoops to that level, I think the group
will be fine.
--
Compatibility and update matrix of Red Hat(R) distributions:
http://www.vaporwarelabs.com/files/temp/RH-Distribution-FAQ-3.html
http://www.vaporwarelabs.com/files/temp/RH-Distribution-FAQ-4.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith at ieee.org
More information about the Discuss
mailing list