No subject

Fri Dec 18 02:33:18 GMT 2009

be five themes.

1.  Some people are in favour of an 'ACC', giving the community a say
in how things are run.
2.  Some people are happy with the way things are now.
3.  Some people have real grievances about how they have been treated
in the past (& present).
4.  Some people think that 'Less Talk - More Action' is required.
5.  The Silent Majority.

"Everybody is right and all of your arguments are valid."
We bring with us, our own Prejudice, Ego, Agenda, Thoughts and
We just differ on how we perceive the situation. Does it need fixing?
How to fix it?

When I presented the Model, I admit that it might have scared some
people (Maybe I didn't sell it enough).
It is not really a scary document, it does talk about 3 levels,
'Local, State, National' and it goes into some detail about Roles,
Responsibilities, Elections and 'what if' scenarios. I apologise, it
is due to my 'Systems Analyst', 'Big Picture thinking' and my
'Applications/Programmer', 'small details' background.  (That's enough
about me)

The Model was a collaboration so I can't take all of the credit. (Not
that I'm seeking it)
As there has been NO comment on the structure of the model, IMO, it
must be pretty close to the 'money'.
Not to say that there is no room for improvement or changes.
I have made slight changes to it see

Out of the discussions a couple of concerns that people raised:
1.  "The Model is three(3) levels of 'Bureaucracy'
It is NOT a 'Bureaucracy', there are just three(3) levels
'Local'- A group of people on the ground, at a local level, 'City' or
'State'- IF the numbers on the ACC get too large for meaningful
discussion/decision making
THEN a 'State Council' would be formed. ELSE a possible 'Talk-Fest'
with no decision making at the ACC meetings.
'National'- A collection of representatives(leaders), from the 'local'

Everybody is autonomous, just like it currently stands.
Anybody can make a contribution in anyway as they see fit (within
reason, that doesn't damage ubuntu-au).

2.  "There is no need for 'Titles'"
It is true that you don't need a 'Title' to make a contribution or be
a 'Leader'.
It is also true that you need to 'Earn' a 'Title', through your

However, people are identified through their 'Title', it gives us a
clue as to their role within an organisation.
A 'Team Contact' performs a role, a 'Local Contact' performs another,
a 'Web Master' performs another. etc.
When a 'New' person comes along, they look for people with a 'Title'
and have certain expectations.
An organisation that doesn't APPEAR to have many people with a 'Title'
does little to inspire peoples' interest (& confidence). 'Who do I
contact?,  Who do I talk to about this?, Is there somebody local?'
You may argue that 'what we currently have', addresses these issues,
IRC, email list etc.  But is it really enough?

3.  "We don't have the numbers?"
Is this a 'Chicken & Egg' scenario?  Acccording to the 'Official
numbers' there are 211 members(launchpad), with 337 subscribers to
this list. Duplicates ??
Who knows how many 'Un-official' members we have, Ie. Those who
register on the '' website and go no further! (This is a
question I have been asking, for a long time and have yet to get an
answer. It seams to be a secret!  I see new people every time I take a
look at the website.) Then there is 'Facebook', 'Google Groups',
'flickr' and numerous other groups around the place.

Maybe the Question should be, "How do we Motivate this silent majority
to become active?"
My answer would be "Put in place an environment & structure to foster
We just need to look at the phenomenon of 'Ebay', 'Facebook',
'Twitter' to see this. (These may not be the best examples) When you
build a structure around a sound concept things happen, the 'snowball'

One 'Goal' of the ubuntu-au community could be to have a 'Local' group
in every 'Capital city'.
Whether it be a part of a 'LUG' or another organisation or
independently organised.

Currently it seems that we have 'active' groups in 'Brisbane &
I don't know what happens in 'Melbourne & Sydney', either nothing or
nobody else hears about it. (I shouldn't have to ask) According to our
'wiki membership list' there seem to be many people in 'Sydney &
I'm sure that there is enough 'leadership' material, for a 'local-
Contact' & someone to organise.

For the other Capitals, Nothing much happens in 'Hobart, Canberra,
Darwin or Perth', from what I can tell.
There needs to be 'Support' & 'A Mechanism' to bring people together
wanting to form their own 'Local Groups'.
It is not enough to 'tell' people 'That they need to become more
active' without helping them. (Less talk More-action)

We have the tools, Website, Wiki, IRC, mailing list but we are not
using them properly.
I have created a 'mock' website at to
illustrate extra information that could be
conveyed to current & new visitors on our website, but
this is not the subject of this post.

Currently the numbers on an ACC could be 'Team-Contact, Web-master,
Brisbane, Adelaide' with possibly 'Sydney & Melbourne'  That makes
six(6), a nice number to start with.

TRIAL PERIOD:  18 Months
As it has been previously stated there would be a review in 18 months
time as to the effectiveness of an ACC and the Model.  If it doesn't
work we can scrap it, if it needs changing we can change it.
In my mind, 'Nothing ventured, nothing gained"

Nothing really changes, Individuals & Groups are autonomous.
Nobody will be 'telling' anybody what to do. 'Guiding' yes - 'Telling'

The ACC (Leadership group) is a visible 'Contact' that provides
'Support & Consultation' to the ubuntu-au community, the community at
large and to each other.

Adopting this model has many advantages, with very few disadvantages.
Among the best:
1. It shares 'leadership' amongst many. (Currently there is very
2. A 'Visible' contact at a local level for existing and new people.
(Currently limited)
3. Co-ordination at a National level. (None at the moment)
4. Group goals can be set and implemented. (Currently they are very
5. Extra communication channels going both-ways. (Currently limited)
6. A 'Roadmap' for the 'Present' with the 'Future' in mind. (???)
7. We could be a well organised group that is to be taken seriously.

Hopefully, I have convinced some of the 'nay-sayers' that this model
is a good one and that it needs to be implemented.  In some respects
it is 'already' implemented, anybody has the freedom to create a
'Local' group or 'BE' a leader.  It 'Formalises' it a little bit and
hopefully it will foster more participation amongst ourselves & in
turn the wider community.

I know that some of you still don't care either way because you are
happy with how things are currently or that you think that things are
not broken so why fix.  Some think that there is a problem and that
this may go part of the way to solve it.  Others just want 'Less Talk
and More Action'.  Then there is the 'Silent Majority'.

For it to work, it needs the support of this community and especially
the 'leaders' in the group.

Most importantly it needs the support of out 'Team Contact' Melissa

Melissa, You have been very quiet, observing these proceedings!
I'm sure that you have an 'Opinion' we would like to hear?
(You do hold a certain 'Sway' in this community)
Will you Work (& Share) with the members of an ACC (The
representatives from 'Local' groups) ?
Will you allocate access to resources to implement 'change' if it is
deemed necessary?


Can we get some sort of 'CONSENSUS' that this 'PROPOSAL' be

Do we need to take it to a 'VOTE'?  (if we take a vote, how will it be

Thanks to Daniel for asking this
"The question we should be asking is what needs to be done and what
being done with the current system and how adding this will help.   "

I hope that I have gone some of the way in answering your question.

We all have one thing in common, a passion for 'UBUNTU' and that #1
bug to work on.


Andrew G.

PS.  I have tried to follow the guidelines set down in
This post has been made available as an attachment at

More information about the ubuntu-au mailing list