*Sigh*

[Michael McMahon]

Matthias and Ubuntu Canadian team,

Matthias thank you for your input and insight into the LoCo spirit.  I have
been watching different mailing list interactions in the community side of
the internet for a while now.  Most often the issues inside the community
are what I characterize as artistic differences.  People need to learn to
work things out as a group and accept that people have different views on
our community, much like the one's we all live in.

So as for our community here is my perception.  (Everyone please take a deep
breath).  If this starts another flame war, I have decided that I will most
likely leave for another Linux group, that embodies the spirit I seek.

- Alex and a few others began this LoCo, and I thank them for this, without
that start I would not be here either, we need to give credit to those early
people for there work.

- Not sure what happened but the group became dormant (Alex you were not
here).  As the contact for the group I would have expected a little
communication in regards to I am really busy.  We all have lives that
compete for our time and effort.  In a community a little common decency may
have averted all this stuff.

- Some members felt that you lack of presence signaled a lost interest or
lack of faith in our community.  I have seen this in a lot of open source
groups that start off with a big bang and then people just do not have time,
but will not admit it or keep fighting it so long that the group dies.

- Some members of this community then decide that they would try to get
things moving again, with no keys to the kingdom (website, mailing list).
They decide to do some research and come up with a plan to get us back on
track, or at least refueled for another adventure.  This seems to have been
met with some personal antagonistic mail and replies.

- We need to stop and think right now, we are at the abyss, what we choose
to do as a community now will shape the very group that is here.  We need to
ALL compromise on our views.  Let's think about that, what is worth fighting
for and what is not.  We are supposed to be promoting community and we look
childish - ALL of us.

So what am I proposing?

1. We (the community) need to agree on what our presence will entail.
2. We (the community) need to agree on who will maintain the parts of our
presence.

3. We (the community) need to decide on a method of communicating changes
and process for getting them done.

4. We (the community) do not need leaders we need entrepreneurs in the
group, the true leader will rise to the top because of the involvement and
the respect of others.

5. We (the community) need a framework to assist new people in getting
involved and feeling encourage to do so.

Well I think I have presented my thoughts, and I accept that we may not all
agree.  I am open to discuss this privately or openly.  I want to thank you
all for reading this and I hope no one is offended.

Michael McMahon
-----Original Message-----
From: ubuntu-ca-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com
[mailto:ubuntu-ca-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of Matthias Urlichs
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 1:30 AM
To: Alex Combas
Cc: ubuntu-ca at lists.ubuntu.com
Subject: Re: *Sigh*

Hi,

Alex Combas:
> Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> 
> > main problem is one of semantics -- "leader" can be "one who leads by
> > setting an example for others" (so that others follow by their own free
> > will), or "one who tells others what to do" (so that others are coerced
> > to do what the leader wants). 
> 
> Matthias, can you please explain to me what exactly 
> the "LoCo Team Contact" job is all about?
> 
See the UDU wiki page, http://udu.wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoTeamProcess

> Is this just a thinly veiled disguise for the term "Leader" or not?
> 
Definitely not.

> Personally I dont think LoCo Groups need a leader, we should just 
> co-operate as a group.
> 
That depends on the group.

> > *If* there is more than one person to whom that term (again, in its
first
> > sense) applies to, *then* it is appropriate to conduct a vote. 
> 
> So if there is more than one person who is leading by example then we need

> to have a vote?

"appropriate" != "need to".

> This whole idea of a vote bugs me.
> 
To clarify my thoughts on the matter: The idea of solving interpersonal
problems by voting is flawed.

>  [ history ]
> I won the vote, you saw that I won because you were on the mailing list.. 
> 
I may or may not have actually noticed -- can't remember at the moment;
I was plenty busy. :-/

> Next thing I knew almost two months had gone by and Andrew is again
calling
> for a vote. 
> 
I agree that that seems inappropriate.

-- 
Matthias Urlichs   |   {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de   |  smurf at smurf.noris.de

-- 
ubuntu-ca mailing list
ubuntu-ca at lists.ubuntu.com
http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ca