[wellylug] Very Important: Meeting of 13th Feb 2005
Jamie Dobbs
jamie.dobbs at orcon.net.nz
Tue Feb 14 14:37:03 NZDT 2006
On 2/14/2006, "Mark Foster" <blakjak at blakjak.net> wrote:
<snip>
>
>If I may use the Auckland LUG (as it evolved from NZLUG) as a comparitive
>example:
>
>- "In Charge" translates to "Administers the Mailing List". So in effect
>there is no person "In charge of the LUG".
>
>- Meetings are arranged by a volunteer who also happens to be one of the
>Mailing List admins.
>
>- Events such as Installfests etc have their committee, etc, determined by
>'who volunteers'. Tasks are divvied up and 'in charge' becomes somewhat
>subjective. As a group, major decisions are discussed, conclusions are
>come to etc. The person who is in charge on-the-day (might be likened to
>'Operations Manager' is not the same person setting policy for the
>event... more just keeping things ticking over on the day. And those
>people hold no responsibility 'for the LUG' either.
>
>- This seems to work. Noones complained, everyones voice gets heard,
>reason seems to win out in the end.
>
>So why do you need a figurehead? or heads?
>
>Mark.
This echoes my thoughts as well Mark. WellyLUG have been down this path
before so why does it need to again? The current structure (or lack
thereof) seems to work for most people so to use an old addage :- If it
ain't broke, don't fix it.
IMHO a loose collection of like minded folk will always do better than a
formal structure where any decisions have to be signed in triplicate and
buried in soft peat for 6 months before anything can be done (apologies
to Douglas Adams).
Look at what the LUG has acheived in recent years without any major
formalisation and ecide if formalisation would improve this at all....
in my view it wouldn't.
..just my 5 cents worth
cheers
Jamie
More information about the wellylug
mailing list