[atlarge-discuss] Committee-work and Outreach (was Re: Procedures Re: Jeff's[atlarge-discuss] How does the ietf do it?)

[espresso@e-scape.net]

Once again I apologize for the waste of bandwidth involved in responding to Jeff, but some of his comments do deserve some response. I quote only where absolutely necessary for clarity:

At 22:15 -0700 2002/10/25, Jeff Williams wrote:
>espresso@e-scape.net wrote:
[snip]
>> >> Well, within the Editors' Association of Canada alone, there are a national executive, executives of five regional branches, and quite a number of standing and ad hoc committees in the regions as well as the national organization. At any given point in time, perhaps two or three of those groups are going through a bad patch while the rest get on with their work.
>> >
>> >  Really?  Hummm?  Perhaps you have some URL references and hard
>> >data to support these examples?
>>
>> I do, but as you can well understand, I am not in a position to give you access to information restricted to members of the organization in question.  I can assure you that the organization has existed for over 20 years and that almost all of its activities to date have been organized by committees of volunteers.
>
>  Ok.  Well than what about your reference to the "National organization"?
>Surely they have an actual URL that supports your previous contention?
>What might that URL be?

Actually, there are two domain names -- http://www.editors.ca and http://www.reviseurs.ca (which could have been located with any search engine) -- and each of the two involves multiple URLs linking to various sections and documents. If you explore the site, you will easily see that each branch hosts its own pages wherever it likes and decides for itself what materials to post. 

You will also notice that I am not listed in our Online Directory of Editors (I get enough work at this point in my career that I don't advertise when I'm too busy to take on random clients), which is hosted externally. However, before you announce that I'm lying about being a member (I've been one since 1984), please note that you can reach me from the Quebec/Atlantic Canada Hotline link, as well as by trying to subscribe (which you can't, since you're not a member) to our French-language mailing list of which I am the list manager.

Note that the deliberations of the executives and committees are not posted in public. Some branches do post their newsletters, though, so you can get a sense of how we work from the reports therein, as well as from the fact that the Web site includes quite a number of useful documents about or for editors.

>> Most committees in the non-profit world are collaborations among people who have volunteered their time to accomplish some particular task.
>
>  Very true.  Hence in part why I am still a bit confused why you feel that
>you should be paid for you volunteering or self appointing yourself as
>Secretariat of this organization.  ???  Not that I have a problem with >that, just seems that it doesn't jive with this comment/ contention/ >statement...

The confusion is evidently internal since at *no* point in any of my postings did I suggest that anyone should pay me or any other member for serving as secretary of a committee. In point of fact, I am unutterably opposed to payment of members for work which should be voluntary -- it creates conflicts between personal interests and the organization's, and (evidently) jealousy on the part of those who fear they won't be paid for their own efforts.

Also, it was never suggested by me or anyone else that I should be Secretary of this (quasi-)organization) -- I merely volunteered to be recording secretary for WG-Outreach and Jefsey (rightly or wrongly) put me on the subscription page for the Outreach mailing list under the heading "Secretariat" so people would know who to e-mail if they had trouble subscribing!

The position of Secretary of an organization is that of an elected officer and, as I said in the message you responded to, the Secretary of the organization (whether or not also expected to serve as secretary of all committees as you had suggested) is expressly prohibited from receiving compensation for serving in that capacity. 

[snipping out the bit where Jeff objects paragraph by paragraph to my description of the usual role of a Chair]

I had written previously:
>> I am, however, very tired of your combattive approach to whatever others say.
>
>  I am not combative.  I am challenging.  I many times will challenge
>certain assertions, conclusions, and processes that need or I feel should
>be challenged.
>
>> If you would like to sue me for saying so, as you seem to be hinting in the above paragraph [not quoted here], by all means do. You have provided (and this group has archived) more than enough evidence for my defense.
>
>  Take me to court.  Or I you wish I will happily take you to court if I feel it
>is necessary, in the best interest of this organization, or is in defense of my
>point of view as to defamation by you or anyone.  Thankfully in my country,
>and especially in my state, Judge Cruz, Texas State Supreme court, is very
>well known for issuing summary judgments for such comments such as yours,
>regardless of your jurisdiction as you also should know it the US District
>court 10th district as also Microsoft found out again recently...

Fortunately, I am not litigious and have no plans to take up residence in Texas. However, I disagree that suggesting I'm a liar with mercenary intentions is merely "challenging", let alone constructive. Our fellow-members can draw their own conclusions about our conversations without recourse to the courts, and I'll gladly abide by their judgment.

>> Our fellow-members will eventually decide what they want and vote for it. If they don't, "tant pis" (French for "so much the worse for them") -- there are other means to the same ends.
>
>  Very much agreed here!  Well stated as well here Judith!  >;)

>> You have also seen that a number of us agreed we should look at these things before launching into a worldwide membership drive, -- not least because some of the things in question are the *means* of publicizing and recruiting, which we would need to have in hand in order to do the job when the time comes.
>
>  I have also seen that many have seen fit to believe that it is not necessary
>to wait to launch a worldwide membership drive.  In fact with the web page
>register link it is clear that redressing what you contend here is moot.
>Again see:  http://icannatlarge.com/register.php  for instance....
>
>> Would you honestly prefer that these things not be done? and, if so, why on earth did you volunteer to help do them???
>
>  I did not volunteer to implement Richards suggestions.  I volunteered
>to improve outreach, aid in funding, and assist in DNS issues for this
>organization...

As anyone can see from the archives, the WG-Outreach will be dealing with recruiting and retention of members, developing relations with other organizations, etc. rather than funding or DNS matters. (We do have a WG-DNS but not yet a WG-Funding.)

Merely having a registration form at icannatlarge.com for people to stumble on more-or-less accidentally is unlikely to lead to a massive increase in membership, now or later. Those who do land there and choose to register are most welcome, of course, but they are unlikely to justify a claim that the organization speaks for the worldwide constituency of Internet users. As I recall, it was hoped that membership would reach 100,000 (from around 1000) rapidly and mean more than that one was capable of filling in a simple Web form. If the organization still wants that, some further efforts will need to be made, I think. If you'd rather trust to the form to do the job automatically, you can certainly say so here and within WG-Outreach.

Also, *nobody* in WG-Outreach volunteered to implement a particular person's vision -- we volunteered to consider strategies, ways and means related to outreach for this organization, to make recommendations, and to implement whatever measures the members decide are appropriate. I would imagine the same is true of those who volunteered for the other working groups, too.

In another thread, Jeff, you seemed to object to a call for volunteers in addition to those of us who signed on months ago. Personally and as a member of WG-Outreach, I would advocate that we make sure new members of this group know their input is welcome and that one virtue of committee-work-by-e-mail is the fact that there are always enough seats at the table. "Many hands make light work" and multiple brains applied to a problem are undoubtedly better (and more democratic) than just a few.

Regards,

Judyth



##########################################################
Judyth Mermelstein     "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
Montreal, QC           <espresso@e-scape.net>
##########################################################
"A word to the wise is sufficient. For others, use more."
##########################################################



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de