[wellylug] Formalising WellyLUG - revisited

[Wood Brent]

Apologies for the length, but I believe the issues are important enough to the
future of WLUG be discussed & pondered before the Feb meeting. I'll see if this
can be my last post here on this topic for a while, though :-)



> >My current way of thinking is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" 


I agree in principle, but the issue here seems to be that some members believe
it IS broke, & are proposing a fix. 

They would like to be able to be involved in Linux in ways the current WLUG
structure doesn't facilitate. If they (who are members as much as anyone else)
see a need for change, then from their pespective, WLUG is indeed broke, and in
need of repair.

To a large extent, IMHO, the "if it ain't broke" opinion can be rephrased as
"if WLUG does what I want, it shouldn't be changed just to allow it to support
what anyone else wants, even if it still does what I want". 


Surely the functions of WLUG are the priority, the structure is simply the way
we believe is best suited to support/provide the functions?

There is a big difference between "I want to be in a Linux group with no formal
structure" and "I want the current WLUG list, meetings, etc to continue
unchanged, with or without a more formal WLUG structure, but if some users see
a need for a more formal structure to meet their needs, then if WLUG can
provide what both of us want, that's fine by me"

Will "WLUG" becomes a facility where you can come to enjoy what one sector of
WGTN Linux users believe is fun, but not if you, as a Linux user, want
something different?

This is the selfishness I hoped would not raise its head. Linux has a wide
varety of users, & IMHO, WLUG should seek to be a group which can welcome any
users, and can have more than one face or role within the WGTN Linux community,
not a USER group with the underlying tenet of "enjoy Linux how I do or go
somewhere else".

I believe the current goal for WLUG should be to see what it is that different
members would like WLUG to be for them, and sort out a setup which enables the
current monthly meetings, list, etc. to continue pretty much as now (a first
priority!) but also lets others enjoy and participate in a Wellington Linux
Users Group that encompasses what they want it to be/do (if in fact the current
one doesn't).

I also believe any Linux user or Linux related activity should be supported by
the group, UNLESS it entails a lack of support for other Linux users, or is
disapproved of by the majority of members. I have no real concern whether WLUG
is run by a _benevolent_ dictator or a committee, provided it is supporting
Wgtn Linux users generally, not just a subset, and provided the structure
enables as many Linux users as possible to get what they want out of the users
group.


If WLUG as a group is not there to be of use to the broader community of Wgtn
Linux users, but only to meet the desires of a subset, perhaps a name change
would be appropriate?


It is also intriguing how there seems to be an impression that any change must
necessarily be for the worse. I can't see how a structural change in the
organisation of the group will have any real impact on the monthly meetings,
etc. As I see it these are the foundations to build on, & ensuring these are
ongoing should be the primary goal of whoever/whatever runs WLUG.


What the change can do, and I believe should do, is provide a formal means for
other Linux activities to be run under the WLUG umbrella, if this is what some
Wellington Linux users desire.



'nuff said for this week :-)

  Brent Wood