[oclug] installfest:when -- red tape -- not

[Jon Earle]

So... remind me once again why we are incorporating?  Have we made
progress?  Is the forthcoming red-tape and papertrail better than the
ad-hoc procedures which seemed to work well in the past?

Oh well.... I suppose I should actually pipe down. I didn't voice my
opinions on clubs and boards in the past (mainly because I never once
thought that we'd let politics get in the way - on the surface, it
seemed like a good enough idea), so I can't really complain now that the
ink has more or less dried on the paperwork.  It's just sad to see this
starting.

Jon

On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, David Rowe wrote:

> As a volunteer in a number of organizations who has organized big events and
> projects, I must agree to the spirit of what Andrew is saying if not the
> details.
> 
> OCLUG must have some minimal red tape process in place to take a project
> idea through to 'officially' recognized and supported.
> 
> This can be as simple as voting it so at a meeting.
> 
> For the InstallFest:
> 	- at the meeting or via this list start a discussion on an idea (RFV
> essentially) -- DONE
> 	- then ask for official status on this list for the next meeting -- DONE
> 	- at a meeting vote it as an official project; ballot choices are: no, yes,
> or needs changes
> 
> If enough people come forward to make the project run then you don't need
> OCLUG official status -- unless you want the OCLUG name behind the project,
> or the tax reciepts from OCLUG's incorporation, or you want more people from
> OCLUG who only commit to OCLUG official projects.
> 
> To get the benefits of the OCLUG name behind a project, OCLUG membership
> must formally accept the project -- no way around this.  Formal acceptance
> process(es) should end up in OCLUG's bylaws, policies, and procedures.  The
> simplest being a majority vote to make it so at a meeting.
> 
> Otherwise me and my buddy will start an 'OCLUG' sponsored project to catalog
> all the beers we have ever drunk on a database machine donated by my
> consulting company which will get a $20,000 tax reciept from OCLUG for a
> beat up 486 :-).  And in a court of law defending against my lawsuit to get
> my reciept OCLUG can't say this is not an OCLUG project if other projects
> didn't need formal approval.  Silly and sad but comes with the territory of
> having something worth having -- OCLUG's good name, tax reciepts, and
> resources.
> 
> Despite all these words, I think Chris needs to stand up at the next meeting
> and in 30 seconds get a vote to approve an InstallFest project and get on
> with it -- we have spent too much time discussing this already.  If
> necessary approve doing the planning process and put the completed plans to
> another vote to implement.  But get on with it...
> 
> David Rowe
> former member of school councils, current member of Scouting, member of
> OCLUG
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: oclug-admin at lists.oclug.on.ca
> [mailto:oclug-admin at lists.oclug.on.ca]On Behalf Of Jon Earle
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:45 PM
> To: OCLUG List
> Subject: Re: [oclug] installfest:when
> 
> 
> Lovely.  The politics have started and the red tape is rapidly flowing and
> drowing all in its wake.
> 
> Form a committee to assess the possibility of convening a meeting to
> discuss the likelihood of organizing a study of the social, economic
> and environmental impacts to OCLUG members of an installfest.
> 
> Can't we just get it done?  People, this ain't the government - it's a
> _c_l_u_b_.  Is this the kind of crapola we should expect in the new order?
> 
> Jon
> 
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Chris Herrnberger wrote:
> 
> > On Wednesday 25 April 2001 14:03, you wrote:
> > > Again, I would like to stress my belief that if we're going to do things
> > > as a group there should be a RFV (request for volunteers) and a
> committee
> > > formed.  The event should be registered with the board and approved as
> an
> > > 'oclug event'.  Otherwise it's just someone running their own little
> > > show, and this is one of the major reasons groups fall apart.
> > >
> > Sure I understand that and that is the dualism that I posted my concerns
> > about on the oclug-board-list Andrew. It will be a real challenge from now
> on
> > to get things done though if this is the only perspective as it cripples
> > individual enthusiasm and volunteerism. Please do think carefully about
> it.
> >
> > While I fully understand your desire to control OCLUG activities it will
> be
> > difficult challenge to determine the nature and limits of such control.
> One
> > way out is not make this an OCLUG activity and rather include all the
> LUG's
> > and make it a LUG event in which OCLUG is one of many participants. Its
> > actually my preferred way to go. Alternatively another method of project
> > control is to allow individual efforts to reach maturity as in the CAP
> > project and then OCLUG can choose to endorse it or not once a project has
> > shape and function. Finally the third alternative is to have officially
> > sanctioned OCLUG projects right from the get go that are subject to the
> > overhead you mentioned. What ever route is selected and there can be many
> of
> > the above, in no case should the burden of beraucracy stifle creativity
> for
> > the sake of control. The process is the issue.
> >
> > Just food for thought.
> >
> > Best as always.,
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > oclug mailing list
> > oclug at lists.oclug.on.ca
> > http://www.oclug.on.ca/mailman/listinfo/oclug
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> oclug mailing list
> oclug at lists.oclug.on.ca
> http://www.oclug.on.ca/mailman/listinfo/oclug
> 
> _______________________________________________
> oclug mailing list
> oclug at lists.oclug.on.ca
> http://www.oclug.on.ca/mailman/listinfo/oclug
>