[Linux-aus] State representation on the board

[Anthony Towns]

On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 02:03:42AM +1100, Stewart Smith wrote:
> I have tried to encourage communication both between LUGs and with LA
> through the lug at lists.linux.org.au list, but little has happenned there
> (i'm not really sure how to combat that). Suggestions welcome - 

Really? Here's mine: get people from each state on the ctte. :)

Being on a list is fine and dandy; being in the core group, which has
access to all the information, and actually makes the decisions is best.
Failing that, having as easy access to someone in that situation as
possible is best.

> This then leaves the LA ctte open to be the best-people-for-the job and
> not just someone from each state (who may do a worse job than one from
> an already represented state).

The best person to coordinate Linux Australia's activities with people
in Queensland is someone in Queensland.

Sure, being a braniac or a hyperactive go-getter is cool, but it doesn't
come close to the benefit of being on site.

> > > Besides, I'd prefer to elect a committee of professional NSW
> > > people than a bunch of incompetent others...
> > I don't think any of the nominees are incompetent, so that doesn't sound
> > like a plausible alternative.
> think of it as adequate versus brilliant and it sounds a bit bitter.

Think of "being near the people in the communities we want to involve" as
just another attribute of a candidate, like "enthusiasm" or "hacker-cred".

(And anyway, LA's goal over the past few years has been to *reach*
adequate...)

> I think you've just convinced me that regular summaries/newsletter type
> things are a Real Good Idea(tm) to keep the communication levels up.

PlanetLA?

> > Personally, I think as a first step we should increase the number of
> > ordinary ctte members to perhaps six or seven, so we don't have to make
> > choices like "drop Anand from the committee, or don't have any involvement
> > from one of ACT/South Australia/Queensland for a year".
> There is a problem with larger cttes - it gets really hard to get them
> all in the one place (for a phone conference, let alone a physical
> meeting). 

There's a problem with smaller cttes too: that there aren't enough
people to do the job. And really, if you've got a ctte of ten, with four
officers, and six ordinary members, it's probably no great loss if a couple
of meetings lose a couple of members.

> Plus - although being on the committee is a great way to get recognition
> ("I'm on the committee of BLAH" sounds good), it's not the only one -
> and in fact can be a rather poor one (nobody outside the ctte wants to
> do anything in fear of not getting recognition). Maybe a LA "doers"
> group is what's needed - with a decent amount of recognition and
> publicity?

Again, I don't really think "LA" is actually about "doing" things -- LA
doesn't "do" linux.conf.au, the LUGs do it, with LA's support. LA doesn't
do linmag.au, Kim does that with some help from LA. We've already got
groups for *doing* things -- AUUG chapters, LUGs, hacker organisations
like Gnome and Debian, industry groups, etc. What we don't have is a
group that keeps everyone in .au working together, and helps people in
one area repeat the successes of people in other areas.

BTW, how will voting (and proxy voting) be conducted? If people want
to vote for an Adelaide/Brisbane/Canberra mix for the ordinary members,
is there some way we can do that?

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj at humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

               Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we can.
           http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 307 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20040109/efc07acf/attachment-0001.pgp