ubuntu-us-tn August 5th Meeting

[Be Netritious]

 Valid points mac9416, except most of the team in way or another has
stepped up when asked to take on some responsibility Trustee/POCs active
or not. You and I work on the web site style/structure, quite a few
people have provided content, there are at least three Ops in the IRC
channel, a few manage the mailing list, you and pace worked on team
logos, etc.

Just based on that observation I'm pretty certain as a team we can meet
our needs  without regional POCs/Trustee designations. I do admit though
it was w4ett and binarymutant (the Trustee and East TN POC) that got the
wheel turning on our web site, but can it be said without them we
wouldn't have one?

Just more opinions of course. And please, no one should take this
personal. I'm strictly thinking from a structure vs. value of time point
of view. (Has the overall structure added value to our time in monthly
IRC meetings?) I'm not saying the positions have zero merit, just with
the way things have gone it does make me wonder if the system is working
as designed.

On 8/3/2010 4:32 PM, mac9416 wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Be Netritious <netritious at gmail.com> wrote:
>> (This was accidentally sent to mac9416 directly instead of the list --
>> sorry mac9416!)
> No problem. Gmail isn't very helpful with reminding you to reply to all.  :-)
>
> I agree somewhat with you about the regional PoCs. I guess it's like
> many situations -- when you have a leader, no one else steps up
> because they expect the leader to do everything. On the other hand, if
> no one has any responsibility to do something, it's possible that
> nothing will ever happen.
>
> It's something to think about.
>
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Be Netritious <netritious at gmail.com> wrote:
>> (This was accidentally sent to mac9416 directly instead of the list --
>> sorry mac9416!)
>>
>> I'm not sure what to think to be completely honest. I'm wondering if we
>> are getting anything resolved/accomplished with this topic meeting after
>> meeting. Because we have three "Points of Contact" and a "Trustee" we
>> are now spending 4x the amount of time on elections than with just one
>> Point of Contact. Do we even need a trustee position? And do we really
>> need a point of contact for each region? Can't we just take it upon
>> ourselves to say "Who wants to meet at 'X' to talk about Ubuntu on date
>> 'Y'?" regardless of some political designation in the channel? Also
>> consider when a regional POC goes inactive...everyone is waiting on them
>> to provide at minimum a time and place for local meet-ups..has this
>> discouraged you (any of you) from suggesting a meet-up? I know it has
>> discouraged me, simply because I don't want to step on anyone's toes.
>>
>> I think we are making to much out of these positions and historically
>> simplicity is always better. I'm also under the impression that a LoCo
>> Point of Contact is the only recognized authority in the LoCo by the
>> LoCo Council, and if we stick to being represented by one official I
>> think we can make better use of our time in the meetings.
>>
>> I think as a team we have gotten away from Ubuntu in our monthly
>> meetings. Just my opinion. I won't stand in the way though, and if the
>> team thinks the current structure is good for us then I'm good with
>> that, and will even participate as a POC or Trustee if elected.
>>
>> Apologies for the diatribe.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ubuntu-US-TN mailing list
>> Ubuntu-US-TN at lists.ubuntu.com
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-tn
>>