No Subject

["Robert G. Brown" <bob@xxxxxxx>]

It's been over a week now since I sent out a message calling for a discussion
thread about the future of the group, and I've had fairly good response from 
a number of people. 

I was looking for two things, both of which I would call good responses:

  - "Bob, you're nuts! Our group only has to keep on doing what it's doing 
     now, there's no need or demand for taking things further.:

  - "Bob, you've got things about right, and while there are questions and
     suggestions I have in mind, we do need to work towards common goals."

I beleive that it's fair to say that there has been ample opportunity for 
anyone who wishes to respond, and I would like to report that I have only
received messages of the second kind, and none of the first.

Apparently there is no objection to better organization, doing things with
a little more foresight, and developing some group goals. If there are people
among us who oppose a better organization, we have yet to hear anything from
them.  In addition to postings from Chris, Matt, and Adam, I've had a num-
ber of email exchanges with other KLUG members, all of which indicate thinking
very much along the same lines.

Folks, if we're going to take all of these nice messages and good intentions 
seriously, the time is NOW.  If we really want to build a good group, it's
never too soon.

Perhaps I have been part of the problem. I have not been unwilling to make 
commitments or take charge; my experience with volunteer organizations has
shown me that it's not healthy to get too far out in front of group senti-
ments, one ends up taking all of the responsibility on oneself.  The rest
of the group then comes to rely on one person, and never builds an organi- 
zation.  When that one person becomes unavailable (or perhaps, burns out),
the group suffers or falls apart completely.

I am not willing to be that "one person", and I believe that no one else needs
to place themselves in that position, either. 

During this week, I've wanted to assemble a digest of the message exchanges
I've had with different people, but work-related time pressure and other 
priorities have prevented me from doing that.  Imagine if I was doing more 
for the group than I have already... those activities might have gone by
the wayside as well.  All of us face these choices, these problems. If many
people are working on KLUG matters, a little at a time, the group does not
suffer much if ONE person is A LITTLE late with something.

Many hands make light work.  When many hands work, even heavy work becomes
light.  We need to strive for this, giving everyone a chance to contribute,
perform, and learn.

I would really like to see this group be successful, and I'm willing to do
some things in order to help it to become so.  The key words are "some" 
and "help".

Now is the time... for what?  It appears that everyone who has written agrees
with more organization in principle. Chris wrote well about translating
personal interests and agendas into group interest and action. Adam wrote
about his experience, and enthusiasm for some projects (as well as practical
issues, such as communications costs). Others have written privately about 
related matters.

Matt suggested that we should establish some number, a minimum number of 
people required to vote and make decisions, and extending voting and so
forth to the whole group via email. 

Excellent idea! Let's put this into into practice.

Here's a couple of other things to think about......

1. Election of Officers.
    One effective way to clarify who is going to do what, at least in terms of
    simple things, like calling meetings to order.  Helps other things that
    were on the list of ideas as well, such as who would represent the group 
    if we decide to organize or affiliate more formally.

    Some people may be afraid of this; we're not picking people who will push
    us around, nor are we showing folks who the "best" (whatever that means)
    Linux people are. We WILL give ourselves a chance to pick people who will
    promote smoother operation of the group.

    As I said above... The Time Is NOW. Let's set a time to hold elections.

2. Selection of projects. 
    How are we going to select projects for the group?

    We need to kick around what projects people like and don't like, then
    form a few teams to examine the projects that survive. A team would con-
    sist of a leader who knows something about the project, perhaps a tech-
    nical advisor, and others at various levels (down to complete newbie),
    all of whom contribute and learn -- together.  This team exists to 
    look at the project carefully and tell the whole group what it will take
    (people, time, hardware, money, programming, etc.) to do the job.

    For example, in the messages I've read, there's been a lot of interest in 
    the idea of setting up an ISP co-operative. The approach I outline here is 
    suitable for looking at a project of that complexity, as well as any other
    project on the list.

    We form as many teams as there are project ideas, or people to compose
    them. If we run out of people before ideas, we can take up the other 
    ideas when we get more people.

    We can get more people as the group grows, or as project teams fall apart.

    Project teams fall apart if it is done with the task of examining the 
    idea.

    As the examination of ideas is completed, we can then look at the results
    of the project study team and discuss the project.

    Then, we can decide as a group whether or not we want to do a project.

    Remember, The Time Is NOW. The sooner we get started in this, the sooner
    our group will have some direction.

Now I must join that select group of people who have run on too long, but I
shall not keep you longer. It's now your turn... and I ask for your comments,
critical or otherwise...

                                                          Regards,
                                                           ---> RGB <---