[Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
jdeslip at gmail.com
Tue Mar 9 19:24:33 UTC 2010
I generally agree with what DW said (though the characterization of the
SoCal/NoCal mentality may be a bit simplified...). I have always been of
the opinion that the issues and personal problems in this group derive from
a lack of a well-defined and fair structure/by-laws. A couple months back,
I documented what I thought the root problem was and created a proposed
structure to address them. I did not submit it to the group in deference
for the ongoing process between Neal, Grant and Jono; though I thought this
process mostly hopelessly mired in fixing ill-effects instead of the root
cause of trouble.
However, I find Jono's email from yesterday to begin to address the root
cause (the lack of well-defined structure) of our problems. I think his
proposed leadership model would ensure equality in the group (everyone gets
to vote) and define a clear path towards leadership for those wishing to
bring change to the group. The model, coupled with a some simple by-laws
defining membership, the role of the leader and how decisions are made
locally and statewide would in my opinion go a long way towards solving the
structural and personal problems in the group.
Here is the link to my document mentioned above for the record:
- I hope the forward illustrates why the problems in the group derive
the lack of structure. I am by no means attached to the particular details
of the proposal in this document. It is simply an example. I think
supplementing Jono's proposed leadership structure with some sort of by-laws
would certainly be sufficient - without the need for council member from
If it is not clear, this email and the google-document represent my opinions
only and not those of other NoCal members.
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:24 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ <
ubuntu at darkwingduck.org> wrote:
> On 03/09/2010 07:58 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ wrote:
> > On 03/09/2010 12:44 AM, Jono Bacon wrote:
> >> Hi All,
> >> I just want to clarify my original question as there was a little
> >> confusion reported to me earlier: I am asking whether you feel that the
> >> leadership process is required at all. If you feel the team would
> >> benefit from having that process in place, vote with +1, if you feel
> >> that the team is running just fine without it, vote -1.
> >> Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, all!
> >> Jono
> > -1
> > For my reasons feel free to email me.
> > DW
> There have been a lot of questions about my vote. I figured that it
> would be more productive to reply with my reasons here.
> The issues in the group stem from a leadership style that Neal (Flannel)
> has. The issues have brought up a lot of controversy with the northern
> group. Grant (Grantbow) is one of the people that have brought the
> issues to light. It's a philosophy issue between how those in NorCal
> think and deal with problems vice those in SoCal.
> SoCal thinking has a way of saying "Problems will take care of
> themselves." The NorCal thinking is "Deal with the problem ASAP, fix it
> and move on." This is where you can break down the issue. My problem is
> that when/if a change of power takes place the issue of philosophy will
> not change. If someone from NorCal takes over then the issue still
> remains as those from SoCal will stir that we are spending too much time
> focused on the problems and not enough on what a LoCo should do.
> This is why I feel this course of action is like a very small band-aid
> to a larger problem. What should be done is a set of bylaws on how to
> deal with issues, leadership and how to conduct business. Changing
> leaders will not solve this issue.
> Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list
> Ubuntu-us-ca at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ubuntu-us-ca