[wellylug] Very Important: Meeting of 13th Feb 2005

Mark Foster blakjak at blakjak.net
Tue Feb 14 14:18:42 NZDT 2006

> On 2/14/06, Jethro carr wrote:
>> hi everyone,
>> last night, I did a presentation/discussion on the organisational state
>> of wellylug, and what we should do.
> Jethro,
> If it's a question of you feeling overloaded with organisational
> responsibilities, which responsibilities are onerous and what can I do
> to help?
> Otherwise, I don't really agree that there is a problem.
> I'm quite happy just having the LUG be a loose collection of people
> who use the mailing list or turn up at a physical meeting now and then
> to chat.  If we get the odd person coming along to do a presentation,
> great.  But no explicit agenda, no world domination plans.
> Anyway, let me know when you've sorted something out and I'll decide
> whether it's still something worth participating in.

I have to confess that I too am suprised by the 'problems' being reported.
I've not seen any grief on here since I joined.
Likewise a number of org's ive been involved in (and not just LUGs)
survive without any great degree of 'organisation'.
People who want to help, stick up their hands.
People who dont, dont...
Everyone understands the concepts of netiquette. (well, most do.)
Therefore everyone understands what is expected of them. (well, most do.)
Any rules or policies made in excess of standard netiquette is either for
operational reasons (hard to argue with something required to keep the
website/mailing list operational!) or for policy reasons (and therefore
subject to debate on here anyway).

I don't know that making it much more complex delivers much in the way of
advantage to the LUG.
In the end the LUG is effectively 'mailing list + website + people who
show up at meetings' - the model works very well elsewhere.

So whats broken?


More information about the wellylug mailing list