[wlug_org] Welly LUG list for buy/sell/swap etc

[Wood Brent]

--- Jamie Baddeley <jamie.baddeley@vpc.co.nz> wrote:

> Personally I don't think the org group needs to express an opinion on
> whether a buy and sell site operated by one of our members (who ever
> they are) needs the endorsement of the org group (assuming that is
> actually worth anything)

Do you honestly belive that the opinions of LUG members on the org list have no
value to the running of the LUG? Sorry, but I disagree on this point.

> 
> It's a free market. People can set up what ever they want. Personally I
> think it's best and simplest to steer clear of this.

So what was the furore about the website poll about? Jethro can do what he
likes with the web site, it's his, not "ours". You believe we don't have any
say? I was under the impression that Jethro had undertaken to manage it on
behalf of the LUG. In which case the LUG does have a say. (Or has Jethro
changed his mind?) The current way for LUGgites to have a say is via the org
list.

The buy/sell list was proposed as a LUG facility, to complement existing
facilities, implemented and managed on behalf of the LUG by Tony. It wasn't
"Hey guy's, here's MY new buy/sell list", it was a "Hey guys, what do you think
about this as a new service I run for the LUG? Any ideas as how you prefer it
to work?" 

I appreciate his offer, & told him on the list that I thought it was a good
idea & I, for one, supported it. 

Proposing such things via the org list allows the LUG to implement such things
in a managed, cohesive way, rather than have everyone reinventing wheels and
competing. The idea of the org list & cabal was largely to help bring
cooperation and cohesiveness to the LUG, rather than foster competition &
anarchy.

> 
> Tony can do what he wants. Sam can do what he wants. Jim-Bob Doodad can
> do what he wants. May the best service win.
> 

I don't really think the LUG would be well served by having members competing
with each other in a free enterprise model. I believe cooperation &
communication make a better approach. We are trying to work together are we
not?
(I thought that was why we got together in the LUG, not to compete but to
share/cooperate/help...)

There are a number of ways a buy/sell list could be configured, and if you're
gonna set one up it is sensible and polite to ask other members for their
ideas/preferences. The service provided is likely to be of more value to the
LUG members as a result.



Hey, I'll set up the WLUG porn directory (as the Open Source to such!), and
WLUG spam & virus producers list!! After all, I can do whatever I want & use
the LUG as the front!! Charge for access too :-) Who cares what the other
members think?

I'll tell Shane we don't want LAN place anymore. I have a venue I can charge
for access. I know these are farcical examples, but I think that demonstrates
the fundamental nature of this approach to managing LUG facilities.


I agree with Jamie that there are no rules/guidelines restricting what we CAN
do. We rely on trust, common(?) sense and concensus. Recently this has been
through the org list. I believe it functions well and is a useful asset to the
LUG as a whole in this role.


I suggest running ideas for LUG events/facilities past the org list is a simple
process & a good idea to ensure things set up "by/for the LUG" are something
members are generally comfortable with, and done in a way they feel is
appropriate. It involves other members and fosters the sense of community and
involvement in the LUG rather than setting up members as competitors. Surely a
good thing?


More kudos to Tony for his considerate & consultative approach as well as the
actual offer IMHO.


> The only no no IMHO is using the mainlist to advertise the existence of
> the buy'n'sell site - which I suspect would create objections...


I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I suspect Ewen might be more
rational about this, and see the announcement of a new LUG facility on the main
list in a similar vein to a message advertising a meeting, installfest or other
LUG activity, rather than unnapproved advertising. (Depending on how it is
worded I guess :-)

When LUG members organised an installfest where hardware was available for
purchase, the items were not to be advertised on the lists, but the event could
be announced & discussed? Isn't this comparable?

There is a subtle difference between announcing a LUG service and advertising,
which has been raised/resolved before. 


Brent