[wlug_org] The role of the organizing group

[Wood Brent]

--- Tony Wills <ajwills@paradise.net.nz> wrote:

> At 23:53 8/08/04 +1200, Tony wrote:
> >(Now where's the minutes of that meeting ;p )  As I recall!, the meeting 
> >at which this non-structure was created, said thems who want to help 
> >organise things go over to that corner and sort things out.  No one was 
> >elected to any position, every member is eligible to participate in 
> >organising things hence anyone and everyone in the group has the right to 
> >say stop! 

And every member can say get lost, I don't care what you or anyone else thinks,

I'm going ahead anyway!

>  It's just that for the most part they've said go do it and 
> >don't bother us (much), not that they've given away any power (they've 
> >granted us free run of the place to clean the floors, take out the trash, 
> >and wash the dishes, they haven't given us the land title).  If the 
> >organising group does anything to annoy the membership, it's the 
> >organising group that gives way!!

Sorry, I think you are 100% wrong on this.

If the organising group (or any member) undertakes anything in the name of the
LUG, they can't be required to stop no matter how many members vote. Any vote
is only as useful as every members decision to abide by it. It has no meaning
outside of this context. Everyone is free to ignore whomsever they like... No
rules remember, so no-one can tell me what to do.

There are no rules preventing anyone from claiming to represent the group doing
whatever they like. We are totally dependent on trusting the cabal & the
members to act in a way the general membership assumes is appropriate. No rules
means anarchy, as long as all memmbers act reasonably & sensibly this isn't a
problem....

So a group which anyone can join, unconstrained by anything any LUG members
decide, pretty much fits the description of cabal much better than committee.
None of use were elected to represent members, or can be unelected. We are here
doing whatever we feel like, unfettered by any imposed responsibility.
 
> >
> >I think that a certain one of we had better stop using the term 'cabal' 
> >lest it goes to his head.


Who could that be :-)  Back to dictionaries, can you find a more suitable
description for a group which has no rules, guidelines, membership constraints,
specified roles or defined responsibilities which is effectively in charge of
something? 

Jethro is free to do what he likes with the web site, we're just lucky he takes
an adult, responsible attitude responding to our comments. But he isn't
required to consult by anything or anyone. If we don't like it & he says get
stuffed, it isn't the organising group that gives way, "Wellylug" doesn't own
the name, or the domain, we are spending any $$ on food as I recall, not things
like this. (I'm not sure who it is registered to, but that individual can use
it for a porn site or whatever, we have no control over it that I know of)

So you are free to believe we are not a cabal, I'm free to call the organising
group whatever I like, no matter what you or anyone else says :-) No rules
remember!


> 
> How come no one has commented upon my last post, especially the bit at the 
> end about the role of the 'cabal' (or didn't anybody make it to the end ;-)
> ?? 
> 

Haven't read it yet, I'll keep you happy & post a comment when I do so you
won't feel ignored :-)


Brent