I would vote to somehow establish framework for what we are all accomplishing. Sort of a bullet itemized prioritized list of things the group wishes to get done. That way whomever is deemed in charge works towards the list and who's leadership and accomplishments are measured against a pre-set. That way no one will feel threatened and we are likely to be able to measure progress over a given time quantum. Clearly I would like to see a lot more measurable progress and a lot less talk. Bob ---- <div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:44 PM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ <<a href="mailto:ubuntu@darkwingduck.org">ubuntu@darkwingduck.org</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">On 03/09/2010 10:24 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ 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. > > DW > > I am pulling mt vote of -1 and voting 0. For the reasons stated above I cannot vote +1 for the idea. However I cannot agree that nothing is wrong with -1. -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list <a href="mailto:Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com">Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com</a> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca</a> </blockquote></div>