Defining "Leader"

[Morgan Collett]

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 19:30, David Rubin <drubin at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> "One who oversees material, or resources" this IMHO isn't a leadership
> position and shouldn't be held responsible. In ZA I am the loco
> contact, I in no way am in charge or the head hoohoo or what ever you
> wish to defined leadership by. I am simply the guy that subscribes to
> many lists and gets spamed with information and helps to push the rest
> of his community into being more active and keep them informed.

There's a distinction between authority and responsibility, although
they usually go together.

IMHO leadership starts with simply showing up - nobody else is doing
X, so I'll do it. That becomes responsibility when others trust or
expect you to do it. You gain authority in a bottom up way, if those
people trust you to make the right decisions about doing X - or you
gain authority in a delegated way, from higher powers like the
LoCoTeam council to whom you can defer difficult decisions, or to whom
you are accountable.

So you might have simply showed up and taken responsibility, without a
desire for power or authority, but you gain it anyway. Communities
that have no authority seem to get into trouble sooner or later with
different factions trying to assert their way, leading to a
splintering or simply nothing ever happening. The (global) Ubuntu
community seems to have prospered uniquely because of low barriers to
participation, but clear leadership.

Authority is best handled with humility - "I am simply the guy
that..." - but it requires protection from abuse, by action or
inaction (such as disappearing). I'm happy to sign the LCoC for the
greater good of the community - local and global - as I agree to it
anyway. I don't see it as an enforcement tool but rather a badge of
honour.

Regards
Morgan