[Ubuntu-US-CA] Ok, I am not sure how to put this

[PR]

I have a suggestion, how about settle this Mid-evil Style with a a good
ol' fashioned Joust.

Seriously, it's prolly best to use the Conflict Wiki as mentioned where
LUGS post and users pick apart at the post until it makes sense. 

My two bits.

OlyAnderson

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Garrow <markgarrow at gmail.com>
To: Ubuntu US California <ubuntu-us-ca at lists.ubuntu.com>
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Ok, I am not sure how to put this
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 14:54:09 -0700

Since MarkDude seems to be "waiting" why wait any longer.. part of discovering 
how the team wants to accomplish conflict resolution is in itself a group 
effort, it should be a project.  

I've added a "Conflicts Resolution" line to the Projects page .. 
(https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CaliforniaTeam/Projects) .. although my skills 
editing the wiki are poor, the link doesn't go anywhere.. yet.. perhaps a 
little help from those in the know.  If my addition is inappropriate let me 
know and I'll remove it.

As a start.. here's a bit that I've thought of....

Conflicts I define as procedural.  ie.. "How do I...", "Would it be better 
if.... ", "Would it be ok to....", 


1> Issues should be brought up initially on the mailing list
	a> one issue at a time, clear and concise.  Much like a bug report

2> Discussion on the mailing list or a pre-arranged IRC meeting separate from 
our normal meeting.  IRC meetings in this venu to be logged.
	a> normal IRC meetings should be positive and about upcoming events, 
meetings, experiences etc
	b> past events, meetings can be referenced to mention an online location 
to see positives/negatives/future tweeks to consider.  Future tweeks to be 
mentioned as a topic for normal meetings or placed in the Projects page under 
Conference Box or other appropriate title.

3> In the event a conflict can't be ironed out in the methods above, a team 
vote could be called.  

In the words of Dale Carnegie from the "Golden Book" and "How to Win Friends 
and Influence Enemies",  "Don't Criticize, Condemn, or Complain".  If you do, 
(my words), you end up with Strife, Polarization and no constructive 
resolution.

Best regards,

Mark Garrow (Scunizi)


On Monday, September 27, 2010 01:06:16 pm Mark Terranova wrote:
> Hello California Team, we stand at a crossroads, with paths in front of us.
> I pick the path with less drama and hassles. Whatever the group decides to
> do I suggest we not question each other's * motivations*. This is a
> volunteer group. We are not getting paid to this. Let's assume everyone
> here is involved to share in the Spirit of Ubuntu. We may differ on what
> that means.
> 
> Just to be clear- I don't doubt *anyone's* motivation in this group. To me
> it is clear that there is noble intent all the way 'round.
> 
> *It's not just me that thinks things could be improved here.
> *Sure, we could go details and sort out every little detail that started
> what is currently taking away valuable time from this group. We could read
> logs until we can read no more.
> 
> I would prefer an *open and transparent process* that outlines how we deal
> with problems as they arise. I have been waiting since last year for this.
> Neal said he would do so;
> 
> California team organization, management structure, processes Roadmap
> 
>    1.
> 
>    Jono wrote a blog
> entry<http://www.jonobacon.org/2009/11/10/creating-a-roadmap-for-more-succe
> ssful-teams/>on roadmaps
>    2. Neal says one is "in the works" since Mark suggested it a few weeks
>    ago
> 
> Source: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CaliforniaTeam/Meetings/09December13
> 
> Waiting,
> MarkDude
> 
> PS Whatever people think about this lets not ascribe negative labels to
> people. If it appears that I have done that, I am sorry and that was wrong.
> I do have a right to ask for follow-up on something from last year. I can't
> do much more than make noise until then.