Since I was not there at the beginning, it appears that there is no movement to displace Aaron and from what I have seen Aaron has been done a pretty good job. Agree or disagree with the Board, members all appreciate the time and effort they put in.
Anger and discontentment are not necessarily bad emotions, it is a sign that people still care. They may not agree but they do care. There are a number of ways that this anger and discontentment can be reduced. First, if there is a common understanding or vision of where we are going, there will better alignment among the members. Second, metrics need to be in place to provide a quantitative measure on positions. While conversations are a terrific qualitative gauge, we are sometimes dissuaded by the number and loudness of comments which may not accurately reflect the position of the members. (In meetings, we use keypads to vote so that we know exactly people's position then we have a discussion to get a clear picture - this way we have both qualitative and quantitative information to make a decision). Thirdly, there needs to be a process in place for decisions to be made that is transparent to the members at large. In turn members need to respect decisions made.
I will be quiet now.
At 10:37 AM 12/1/2004 -0700, you wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Anderson
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 9:54 AM
>
> Don't forget that we also voted you in as President because we
> bought into your vision for this group. As much as you hear
> bitching and moaning, the truth that we agree with your vision
> shouldn't be lost.
I wasn't voted in, I took over where Aaron left off and I wasn't challenged
at the next AGM but that is beside the point. I hear you, members of the
group have said that they support me and/or the Board in our endeavours on
their behalf. I have to remind myself constantly that the dissention or
perceived dissention is only from a few individuals. I have stated that
until proven otherwise, we take silence as assent.
> I think it seems like we're all playing gang up on Jarrod
> because even though say 80% agrees with each decision you
> make, there is still a remaining 20% who do not. Each
> decision will be comprised of a different 20%, heck, in
> releasing my post to the group the other day, I think YOU
> yourself fell into the 20%, because you said that it was a
> slip that wouldn't happen again.
Unfortunately, it is the 20% (or whatever number) that I/we hear because
they _are_ vocal. Unfortunate only because I want everyone to be happy or at
least content that we are doing what we were tasked to do and these 20% give
the impression that they are not happy with us. I have to wonder how many
more people who aren't saying anything are also unhappy. This is crippling
me, I have second-guessed every decision I have made for several months now.
> Just keep in mind that 80% is always behind you, and of the
> other 20%, I'd venture to guess that less than 1% of them
> wants to do anything except bitch and moan.
You are probably right. It's nice to hear from someone in the group. The
Executive are pretty tight and supportive of each other but this means more
coming from someone like you in the group. And yes, I believe that there are
people who we will not ever make happy, no matter how hard we try.
> In evidence to that, I'll ask this as a question. How often
> are you asked how you became president, and how someone
> would find themselves in a position to replace you? I'll
> bet the answer is less than twice over the past however many
> years.
I can't think of a single instance in all honesty. Which is sad because at
this point in time I don't know who would succeed me. I know that I will not
be President forever (in fact I am longing to be just a regular member who
doesn't have to deal with this anymore from an administrative point of
view).
> Also, please recognize that the bitching and moaning MAY have
> value too. I'm not trying to trivialize or marginalize it.
> I'm just trying to put in perspective why it seems like your
> position sucks. The reason is that even though most people
> agree with how things go at any point in time, some won't. And
> the won'ts are generally much more vocal. This is true in
> politics, and this is true in CLUG.
I actually agree with you on this, surprised? I have counseled my fellow
Executive to grow thicker skins to be able to take the barbs directed at
them. I have attempted (somewhat successfully) to do so myself but it is
hard not to feel challenged or defensive about a great many things of late.
I guess I keep coming to the same conclusion that I must defend certain
things because there have been decisions made on them in the past. This does
not mean that we are not open to change but rather I/we try to explain why a
thing was done the way it was. The thing people are failing to see is that
nothing is written in stone. If something is too cumbersome or just plain
doesn't work (like our meetings over the past year) then they should be
changed.
Which brings me to something I have vehemently been advocating, change is
good. We are open to change. Keep the suggestions coming. We want people to
feel that this is their group not the Board's.
Thanks for the well thought out words Kevin. I appreciate your insight.
Jarrod Major
CLUG President
Registered Linux User: #224211
GPG Fingerprint: FA4A 1EA3 A0EE A842 07BB 804C 0090 14F6 BE6E DE3D
_______________________________________________
clug-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php)
**Please remove these lines when replying
Kin C Wong
VP Technology
PDK Control Consulting International Ltd
P.O. Box 22310 Bankers Hall
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 4J1
phone: 403-571-0999
fax: 403-571-0991
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: www.csa-pdk.com
_______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
