Post-meeting Mail

[Jared Norris]

On 18 December 2010 14:21, Scott Evans <scott at vk7hse.hobby-site.org> wrote:

>  On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 19:57 -0800, Tom Sparks wrote:
>
> --- On Sat, 18/12/10, Michael Chesterton <chesty at chesterton.id.au> wrote:
> > Ryan Macnish wrote:
> > > Ok, so i will leave the issue of the IRC structure
> > alone, its clear
> > > that some of the loco veterans dont want change, even
> > for the benefit
> > > of the loco. But also if i bring it up again i may get
> > kicked from the
> > > loco.
> > >
> > >
> > > So now we have that sorted, i am agreeing not to bring
> > up any more
> > > issues about the loco that need discussing, because
> > its evident that
> > > some people in the loco are disturbed by this. So you
> > will hear no
> > > more complaints nor see any more action from me on
> > this front.
> >
> > I think the above email is a big part in why the team lost
> > status, and
> > it has set back the reinstate a long time. And it's not
> > nisshh's fault,
> > not one bit.
> >
> > > As for the social stuff, if everyone just announces
> > meetings and
> > > events on the social platform of their choice (be that
> > facebook,
> > > identica, diaspora or whatever) then people will
> > re-tweet it and know
> > > about it, so we may get more activity and
> > participation. Even things
> > > like Urban Terror and stuff should be announced.
> >
> > This is a great idea, it will attract more people, more
> > energy, create
> > more events, except the new people will hit the same wall
> > nisshh hit and
> > nothing will change.
> >
> > I would care except there are so many other really fun and
> > vibrant open
> > source related groups in Sydney (where I live) that aren't
> > affiliated
> > with a company. I believe other states are in a similar
> > position, or
> > could be soon.
>
> the more I read about the ubuntu-au community going downhill (losing of our offical loco status) , the more I feel some people may not be following the Ubuntu Code of Conduct
>
> witch is sad to say :(
>
> tom
>
>
>
>
>
>
> No I disagree, it just seem that the status quot just isn't prepared to
> listen to any suggestions to actually make any headway. So since the LoCo
> loosing it's official status there hasn't been any progress for it to even
> be considered. Sadly it's my opinion that it should just be left as a dead
> resource until the peeps who believe they know better than all look back an
> see why they have no LoCo, I mean OK I was keen to get the meetings going
> initially, and I got some heavy resistance when I dare suggest that a
> meeting be called on a Friday night (with relatively short notice) and to
> the fact that I approached the Ubuntu-LoCo Council to share my thoughts on
> the situation at that time, to be essentially be branded a traitor for doing
> so. Sadly for me the Ubuntu Australian Loco is truly (to my mind) dead and
> not worth the effort to bother to reinstate. I've also (mostly) discontinued
> using Ubuntu in favour to Debian, so my efforts are being focused their
> where there isn't the politics involved and I'm free to contribute without
> the need to be approved by the Elite Club of Membership!
>
> I'm not intending to flame anyone here these are just my opinions on the
> matter, everyone is allowed to share their thoughts just as I have...
>
>   --
> Scott Evans <scott at vk7hse.hobby-site.org>
>
> --
> ubuntu-au mailing list
> ubuntu-au at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-au
>
>
Scott, Nisshh & Michael & Team,

As someone else who was at the meeting I whole heartedly support the
discussion point being raised. Let's be clear, there was no opposition to
the topic being discussed by anyone. As you can see from the logs from the
vast majority the members that were at the meeting it was overwhelmingly
decided that they preferred having the off topic IRC channel. As such it is
not that it was determined that change was the issue rather that that
particular change was the issue. Can you imagine the outcry if we had of
merged the channels back after that meeting when essentially all present
were opposed to the idea? So what came out of the meeting was that the issue
was to be brought to the mailing list to see if the feelings there was
concurrent with the feelings of the people present at the meeting.

So in the interests of following up as it as discussed in the meeting, of
those that actually use IRC, after reading the meeting logs (found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AustralianTeam/Meetings) where the logic behind
separate channels is explained well, what is your preference? For those that
don't regularly use IRC, what can we do to encourage you to join in more?

As for no progress since being denied re-approval I completely disagree with
this. Do we not have regular meetings now (
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AustralianTeam/Meetings)? Are we not organising to
hold a stand at the premiere Australian open source conference (
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AustralianTeam/LCA2011Brisbane)? Haven't we recently
started team reports (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AustralianTeam/TeamReports)?
Has there not been discussion on getting the website more up to date? The
only thing I see since re-approval is that our involvement needs to increase
to achieve the desired outcomes but I think that to is slowly changing.

Regards,

Jared Norris
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/JaredNorris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-au/attachments/20101218/9e3f978b/attachment-0001.htm