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

Brent Wood pcreso at pcreso.com
Thu Feb 16 21:20:15 NZDT 2006


--- Mark Foster <blakjak at blakjak.net> wrote:

& yes, another tome :-) 

If the issues are not important to you, let me know & I'll move this to the org
list.

> 
> Depends on whos making the comments.

Actually it was LUG members I have some respect for. Look at the list to see
how the discussion about MS attendance degenerated into a Red Hat bashing
session. Great promo for both Linux & the LUG :-( Formally recorded in the list
archives.

> I look at it another way.
> The 'Linux Users Group' concept is alive-and-well, world wide.  How many 
> 'Microsoft Users Groups' are there?

When DOS & Windows were new, not mainstream & only really used by a few geeks
there were plenty of computer user groups, Windows & DOS as well as CPM,
Amstrad, etc. (Yes Ewen, I remember :-), Such groups typically run as
counter-cultures or as support groups for minorities.

Now that MS Windows is pretty much on everyone's desktop & the others are
largely dead, they are superfluous. 

The demise of a support network of a few enthusiasts aka xUG's or SIG's can be
a symptom of success, if the focus is no longer "special", or of failure if
what they are supporting isn't really around any more.

> 
> The fact that LUGs can be set up very quickly and without the obligation 
> to become legally configured or affiliated means that its easy for them to 
> spring up - and easy for people who might not otherwise have the time to 
> participate.

What has a "legal" aspect got to do with it? I said before incorporation is a
red herring, and not really relevant. 

Having a formal president (spokesperson), secretary (meeting & monthly event
coordinator), web site maintainer, etc, doesn't impose anything on any other
members at all, but does give someone some appreciation/recognition of the role
they in fact carry out, as well as some kudos to make their jobs easier (at
least in theory :-) 

A constitution holds them accountable to members, & defines what they can &
can't do. Safeguard for both parties, but even if we went that far, such a
document is only a memorandum of understanding, & is not a complicated legal
issue, _IF_ we ever consider one necessary. No one has that I'm aware of.

> > As far as the Wellington installfest is concerned, I would be better off
> > running it as an NZOSS event to get any sort of corporate support. I'm
> > guessing, but I think I could probably get enough experts to assist with
> > installs from people I know & local NZOSS members. So is there any point in
> > involving WellyLUG at all?
> 
> Uhm, yes.  WellyLUG provide the manpower, the expertise, the logistics.
> NZOSS would be providing the 'legal underwriting'. 

Hmmm... most of the support people I've seen there (but I agree, not all!!) are
NZOSS members (I know several that are anyway), so WellyLUG manpower &
expertise may not really be needed, the organisers are NZOSS members, so NZOSS
can manage the logistics (such that they are).

So, WellyLUG perhaps is better off not being bothered with such things? I'd be
interested to know which of the LUG members who have helped with the last
couple of 'fests are _not_ NZOSS members.

The impression I have is that it could run just as easily using just Wgtn NZOSS
support as with WellyLUG's. So what are the majority of the WellyLUG membership
who are not also NZOSS members actually contributing? 

If it was an NZOSS event would they still be interested in supporting it, and
in what roles?

I know the only Wgtn involvement with Software Freedom Day came from Vic Uni's
LUG & NZOSS, nothing from WellyLUG at all.

So I feel that the majority of the LUG membership have pretty much voted with
their feet to demonstrate disinterest in seriously getting behind these events,
while Wgtn NZOSS members have, especially in comparison, shown interest,
support and enthusiasm. 

So, can anyone explain to me what the value is in involving the LUG in a 2006
Installfest? Preferably someone who was involved in the last ones, so they can
show some credibility.

> Theyve already 
> specified that theyre happy to do so - and even have a fund for sponsoring 
> costs incurred up to a point as well.   We've done this successfully in 
> Auckland... every Installfest there has been a LUG one.
> (And we secured corporate sponsorship too.)
> 
> >
> > The comments from several WellyLUG members suggest that events such as
> > installfests are run by a group of enthusiasts, who will get together & do
> > these things anyway.
> 
> Is not WellyLUG that group of supporters?  Would that not effectively be 
> the origins?

Sure, but as I said, the majority of the active Wgtn 'fest supporters are also
NZOSS members, & the majority of LUG members provide little or no support for
such events (again, not all, & I appreciate the help from all of you who have
contributed!)

> 
> > With the NZOSS for branding & support, & enthusiastic individuals who don't
> > need the LUG for these events, why do we have a WellyLUG?
> 
> What does WellyLUG offer? Meetings, Mailing List, forum, website etc etc. 
> Are they not good reasons?  The Linux Users Group can be exactly that - a 
> group of Linux Users - it can have identity, branding, and community 
> involvement. NZOSS have allied, but slightly different, goals.

Agreed, my point exactly! The NZOSS membership has strongly indicated support
for 'fests & SF Day, the LUG membership has already shown they are not really
interested. So why involve the LUG in something the majority of members don't
really want to get involved with? Meetings, forums, list & website is fine.
They add little to organising & running installfests. Willing hands are
required for such events. NZOSS has lists, the meetings we held to organise a
fest have been small meetings of the few interested people, just as easily done
through the local NZOSS people.

I'm not saying I like it that way or prefer that approach. Just that the NZOSS
is saying let's organise, let's support, let's become more effective. The LUG
concensus seems to be: let's muddle along, there's not really any need to
change, let those who want to do things go ahead & do them, otherwise leave us
& our LUG alone. 

Several LUG members don't like politics or evangelising Linux, which is fine.
They have said the installfests are virtually evangelising and are not entirely
comfortable with them. They voiced concern over the "promote Linux" focus of
the LUG goals as on the web site as being a role more suited to the NZOSS. I'm
sorry if I've misinterpreted any comments, but I'm pretty sure that's what was
said/meant. Moving such events to the umbrella of the NZOSS would presumeably
be supported by these members?


So which group is more appropriate to run Wgtn Linux & OS promotional events? 

> 
>   >

> Id much rather be involved in a LUG too.  NZOSS aren't really in the 
> 'Installfest running game', bearing in mind Linux is just one avenue for 
> Open Source.  Theyd support Installfests - perhaps run one in a region not 
> already supported by a LUG - but not replace the role of a LUG.... 
> Installfest are a community thing, and LUGs are representative of that 
> community.

Nope. As per my comments above. The majority of the LUG community have
demonstrated disinterest. If the LUG community prefers a low key approach &
NZOSS is more enthusiastic & promotional, isn't the NZOSS more appropriate.

(Not to be taken that all LUGS or all WellyLUG members feel that way)  

The LUG membership has shown an interest in monthly meetings, a small subset
are active in IRC, & this list works pretty well. Generally, out of the total
LUG membership, maybe 6 at best actively help to organise a 'fest and about
10-15 turn up to help with installs & presentations on the day. As I said,
mostly these are also NZOSS members.  None for SF day. 

> 
> > If the majority of WellyLUG members disagree, and feel that the NZOSS is
> better
> > suited to to be the front organization to promote Linux & OS in & around
> > Wellington, so be it. But I suggest the WellyLUG goals on the website are
> > modified to reflect this, by removing the first two.
> 
> I would hope theres no disagreement.... because you have quite eloquently 
> described the situation.


One of the more successful aspect (at least that is the impression I have) of
our last two installfests has been the presentations. They have been
interesting, informative & appreciated by knowledgeable & new to OS people
alike. To expand these I think would be great, but some NZOSS support in
arranging speakers would be useful. and I believe it is an area it can
potentially add very useful content, which the LUG isn't in a position to do,
and after the BoF proposals, it appears to be something they are interested in
supporting. 

The feeling I'm getting, without actually proposing it as an NZOSS event, is
that the NZOSS, at least in Wellington, is the more appropriate group of people
to organise & support such events, possibly with the support of any non-NZOSS
people in the LUG who are interested.


I guess the questions are (Have you read this far Jethro, is a poll useful?):

How many Luggites want the LUG to be the front group for Wellington Linux & OS
promotional events.

How many are willing to guarantee a serious comittment to helping organise &
run them?

How many believe the NZOSS is more appropriate?

Following that, how many NZOSS members & followers in Wgtn would be concerned
if such events were fronted by the NZOSS instead of WellyLUG?

With NZOSS looking to get more in behind such events, it is likely that future
ones will at least be jointly run, but I'd only be comfortable with that if
WellyLUG actually contributed something in addition to the NZOSS's role.
   
Simply taking the credit without seriously contributing as a group I don't
think is fair.


Brent






More information about the wellylug mailing list