Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
Jono Bacon wrote: > Hi All, > > To those of you who don't know me, I am Jono Bacon and I am the Ubuntu > Community Manager, now residing in the Easy Bay in sunny California. :-) > > Aside from just being part of the team, I have also been helping to > resolve some conflict that has been happening in the team. I have had > some calls with Neal and Grant and spoken to many of you to gather your > input about the team and this conflict. > > Today I had a conference call with Neal and Grant and both identified > that a key issue is that sometimes unresolved issues are left open and > not resolved. Typically in most LoCo teams in these scenarios the leader > will help unblock and bring closure to these issues. While Neal is the > leader Ubuntu California, there was some uncertaintly in our call as to > how formally recognized this is. > > I made a suggestion in the call, but Grant, Neal and I all agreed that > we should not move forward with the suggestion without gathering > feedback from the team as to whether it is needed. As such, I would like > to ask each of you to provide feedback on the following suggestion - > some of you will want to mail me your feedback privately, and some will > be happy to reply to the list. Whatever method you choose: please > summarize *your* view, and not the view of someone who has asked you to > provide feedback one way or the other. The aim of this is for me to get > a barometer of opinion for this proposal. > > This is it: > > I recommend we have a leadership appoint process that works like this: > > * With Neal already the leader of the team, starting from April > 1st 2010 he would start a formally recognized one year term of > leadership (he would be grandfathered in). > * In March 2011 a leadership appointment process will happen > that works like this: > o there will be an invitation for people to nominate > themselves for leadership. There will be a standard wiki > template used for people to produce their case for > leadership and others will provide testimonials. > o a meeting will be scheduled and nominations will be > discussed, there will then be a vote using a voting tool > to identify the leader. > o if there is a draw or some conflict surrounding the > vote, the LoCo Council will evaluate the case and pick a > leader. > > What do you think? Please vote with: > > * +1 - you agree with the above proposal. > * -1 - you disagree with the above proposal. > > Again, feel free to provide feedback privately to me or publicly on the > list. > > Thanks! > > Jono > > +1 -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
I would vote to somehow establish framework for what we are all accomplishing. Sort of a bullet itemized prioritized list of things the group wishes to get done. That way whomever is deemed in charge works towards the list and who's leadership and accomplishments are measured against a pre-set. That way no one will feel threatened and we are likely to be able to measure progress over a given time quantum. Clearly I would like to see a lot more measurable progress and a lot less talk. Bob On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:44 PM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ < ubu...@darkwingduck.org> wrote: > On 03/09/2010 10:24 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ wrote: > > On 03/09/2010 07:58 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ wrote: > >> On 03/09/2010 12:44 AM, Jono Bacon wrote: > >>> Hi All, > >>> > >>> I just want to clarify my original question as there was a little > >>> confusion reported to me earlier: I am asking whether you feel that the > >>> leadership process is required at all. If you feel the team would > >>> benefit from having that process in place, vote with +1, if you feel > >>> that the team is running just fine without it, vote -1. > >>> > >>> Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, all! > >>> > >>> Jono > >>> > >> > >> -1 > >> > >> For my reasons feel free to email me. > >> > >> DW > >> > > > > There have been a lot of questions about my vote. I figured that it > > would be more productive to reply with my reasons here. > > > > The issues in the group stem from a leadership style that Neal (Flannel) > > has. The issues have brought up a lot of controversy with the northern > > group. Grant (Grantbow) is one of the people that have brought the > > issues to light. It's a philosophy issue between how those in NorCal > > think and deal with problems vice those in SoCal. > > > > SoCal thinking has a way of saying "Problems will take care of > > themselves." The NorCal thinking is "Deal with the problem ASAP, fix it > > and move on." This is where you can break down the issue. My problem is > > that when/if a change of power takes place the issue of philosophy will > > not change. If someone from NorCal takes over then the issue still > > remains as those from SoCal will stir that we are spending too much time > > focused on the problems and not enough on what a LoCo should do. > > > > This is why I feel this course of action is like a very small band-aid > > to a larger problem. What should be done is a set of bylaws on how to > > deal with issues, leadership and how to conduct business. Changing > > leaders will not solve this issue. > > > > DW > > > > > > I am pulling mt vote of -1 and voting 0. For the reasons stated above I > cannot vote +1 for the idea. However I cannot agree that nothing is > wrong with -1. > > > > -- > Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list > Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca > -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
Seriously? It's crap like this that makes LoCo communication in any form painful. -Troy -Original Message- From: ubuntu-us-ca-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com [mailto:ubuntu-us-ca-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of Alan Ostlund Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 20:28 To: Ubuntu US California Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process I apologize for voting. I didn't know you had to be a Mo-Betta to vote. I agree, there should be some by laws. As mention in this reply, you don't get a vote unless you are a member of a special group. Is that like only landed gentry have a vote? Does this work like everyone gets a vote, but not the women, like in some other countries, or this one earlier last century? What does it take, exactly, to be able to vote on this issue? Alan Ostlund P.S. I was never very good at keeping my mouth shut, when I am told there are different classes of people. On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 14:31 -0800, Robert Wall wrote: > -1. While I'm glad that we've gotten to the point that we can sanely > have this discussion, I disagree with Jono's proposal for similar > reasons to David and Jack: > > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:24 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ > wrote: > > This is why I feel this course of action is like a very small band-aid > > to a larger problem. What should be done is a set of bylaws on how to > > deal with issues, leadership and how to conduct business. Changing > > leaders will not solve this issue. > > This proposal does little to address the root issues this team has, > and opens us up to some huge possible pitfalls: > > A) It does not define what the responsibilities of the team leader > are, how decisions are made within the team, or what should happen if > the team leader has a conflict of interest and thus can't participate > in a decision. > > B) It does not describe desperately-needed processes for dispute > resolution. This team has issues that have been unresolved for... > what, a year now?... because we do not have anything in place to look > at them and make a final decision. Disputes are going to happen. > Sometimes, they'll involve the team's leader. Even if you rotate the > team's leader, there are very few people on this team that I've never > heard disagree with someone, and they probably would once given the > stress of power ;) > > C) This team does not have a defined membership population. In > Ubuntu-in-general, the people who get to vote for stuff are Ubuntu > Members. They have to go through a process to get to be one. It's thus > difficult for someone to manipulate Ubuntu elections by ballot > stuffing or getting their friends (who don't do anything LoCo-related) > to sign up and vote the way they want, or create multiple accounts, > or... yeah, you get the idea. > > In the LoCo, the only barrier to participation that I can think of is > that the Launchpad group requires approval to get into, which > currently (as I understand it; this isn't written down formally afaik) > consists of me, Neal, or Nathan asking 1) Does your account profile > consist of spam links to foreign drug sites?, 2) Does it look like > you're just joining teams to collect shiny group icons? Not exactly a > high barrier to entry. There is nothing saying who does and does not > have enough team contribution or team association to be able to vote. > Saying "everyone" is not an acceptable solution, because as I've said, > it leaves us wide open to abuse. > > This is an issue in other elections, like the Ubuntu IRC Council > election that happened recently. In that case, leaders were picked by > the Community Council, not voted on by the general IRC population. > That is, as far as I'm aware, the regular way to deal with this > situation in Ubuntu. I'm not necessarily saying it's a good idea in > this case, but it (and the issues I raised above) deserve > consideration. > > D) Voting once a year would likely *increase*, rather than decrease, > the politics and other stupidity that happens on a regular basis on > this team. There's enough bickering already without adding the > additional motive of "If I win this small victory, I'll look better > next year when I try for leadership!". > > I was going to spend longer thinking about this, but the large number > of +1 convinced me that I should probably not postpone it so the > people who don't spend absurd amounts of time thinking about things > like this wouldn't get swept up in the positiveness. Now that I check > my email this morning, I see others have already broken the trend for > me, but anyway :) > > As for what others have s
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
Just a quick response to Robert: Jack: > I agree with you that a set of bylaws would go a long way towards > fixing the problems I outlined above. I agree with most of your > proposal, though as I mentioned above, I have reservations about using > Launchpad membership as a definition of who is eligible to vote. I > also dislike the focus on peoples' regions, as it would tend to > further the image that we have North California vs. South California > battles. > Having written that document many weeks ago, I am not particularly attached to any detail of it. I do stand behind the section "elements required for a sufficient structure", though (i.e. assurance of equality, clear pathway to leadership, prescription for decision making). And, I do believe "some" level of autonomy for different regions of the state should be included in the bylaws, though not necessarily in a council form. It just makes sense that events occurring in one region shouldn't be micro-managed by people all over the state. (Oh God, I sound like some sort of states-righter) But, I imagine some level of general permission should be obtained on a state level and then the dirty details can be left to the people participating. This would greatly expedite our IRC meetings which can often be epic in length. I agree with your reservations about using the launchpad enrollment as a membership list; however, I see no better alternative. In general, I think it is reasonable to leave it up to individuals to decide for themselves if they are opinionated/involved enough to vote. I don't think all that many people go around voting in groups they are now at least mildly invested in. Cheers, Jack -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
On 03/09/2010 10:24 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ wrote: > On 03/09/2010 07:58 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ wrote: >> On 03/09/2010 12:44 AM, Jono Bacon wrote: >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I just want to clarify my original question as there was a little >>> confusion reported to me earlier: I am asking whether you feel that the >>> leadership process is required at all. If you feel the team would >>> benefit from having that process in place, vote with +1, if you feel >>> that the team is running just fine without it, vote -1. >>> >>> Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, all! >>> >>> Jono >>> >> >> -1 >> >> For my reasons feel free to email me. >> >> DW >> > > There have been a lot of questions about my vote. I figured that it > would be more productive to reply with my reasons here. > > The issues in the group stem from a leadership style that Neal (Flannel) > has. The issues have brought up a lot of controversy with the northern > group. Grant (Grantbow) is one of the people that have brought the > issues to light. It's a philosophy issue between how those in NorCal > think and deal with problems vice those in SoCal. > > SoCal thinking has a way of saying "Problems will take care of > themselves." The NorCal thinking is "Deal with the problem ASAP, fix it > and move on." This is where you can break down the issue. My problem is > that when/if a change of power takes place the issue of philosophy will > not change. If someone from NorCal takes over then the issue still > remains as those from SoCal will stir that we are spending too much time > focused on the problems and not enough on what a LoCo should do. > > This is why I feel this course of action is like a very small band-aid > to a larger problem. What should be done is a set of bylaws on how to > deal with issues, leadership and how to conduct business. Changing > leaders will not solve this issue. > > DW > > I am pulling mt vote of -1 and voting 0. For the reasons stated above I cannot vote +1 for the idea. However I cannot agree that nothing is wrong with -1. -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
I apologize for voting. I didn't know you had to be a Mo-Betta to vote. I agree, there should be some by laws. As mention in this reply, you don't get a vote unless you are a member of a special group. Is that like only landed gentry have a vote? Does this work like everyone gets a vote, but not the women, like in some other countries, or this one earlier last century? What does it take, exactly, to be able to vote on this issue? Alan Ostlund P.S. I was never very good at keeping my mouth shut, when I am told there are different classes of people. On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 14:31 -0800, Robert Wall wrote: > -1. While I'm glad that we've gotten to the point that we can sanely > have this discussion, I disagree with Jono's proposal for similar > reasons to David and Jack: > > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:24 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ > wrote: > > This is why I feel this course of action is like a very small band-aid > > to a larger problem. What should be done is a set of bylaws on how to > > deal with issues, leadership and how to conduct business. Changing > > leaders will not solve this issue. > > This proposal does little to address the root issues this team has, > and opens us up to some huge possible pitfalls: > > A) It does not define what the responsibilities of the team leader > are, how decisions are made within the team, or what should happen if > the team leader has a conflict of interest and thus can't participate > in a decision. > > B) It does not describe desperately-needed processes for dispute > resolution. This team has issues that have been unresolved for... > what, a year now?... because we do not have anything in place to look > at them and make a final decision. Disputes are going to happen. > Sometimes, they'll involve the team's leader. Even if you rotate the > team's leader, there are very few people on this team that I've never > heard disagree with someone, and they probably would once given the > stress of power ;) > > C) This team does not have a defined membership population. In > Ubuntu-in-general, the people who get to vote for stuff are Ubuntu > Members. They have to go through a process to get to be one. It's thus > difficult for someone to manipulate Ubuntu elections by ballot > stuffing or getting their friends (who don't do anything LoCo-related) > to sign up and vote the way they want, or create multiple accounts, > or... yeah, you get the idea. > > In the LoCo, the only barrier to participation that I can think of is > that the Launchpad group requires approval to get into, which > currently (as I understand it; this isn't written down formally afaik) > consists of me, Neal, or Nathan asking 1) Does your account profile > consist of spam links to foreign drug sites?, 2) Does it look like > you're just joining teams to collect shiny group icons? Not exactly a > high barrier to entry. There is nothing saying who does and does not > have enough team contribution or team association to be able to vote. > Saying "everyone" is not an acceptable solution, because as I've said, > it leaves us wide open to abuse. > > This is an issue in other elections, like the Ubuntu IRC Council > election that happened recently. In that case, leaders were picked by > the Community Council, not voted on by the general IRC population. > That is, as far as I'm aware, the regular way to deal with this > situation in Ubuntu. I'm not necessarily saying it's a good idea in > this case, but it (and the issues I raised above) deserve > consideration. > > D) Voting once a year would likely *increase*, rather than decrease, > the politics and other stupidity that happens on a regular basis on > this team. There's enough bickering already without adding the > additional motive of "If I win this small victory, I'll look better > next year when I try for leadership!". > > I was going to spend longer thinking about this, but the large number > of +1 convinced me that I should probably not postpone it so the > people who don't spend absurd amounts of time thinking about things > like this wouldn't get swept up in the positiveness. Now that I check > my email this morning, I see others have already broken the trend for > me, but anyway :) > > As for what others have said already: > > Akkana: > I have problems figuring that mapping out too, actually. I generally > look for their Launchpad page (which often has IRC nick and realname), > or ask in PM, apologizing for my bad memory. If that's too direct, > feel free to PM me (rww) if I'm around and we can try to figure it out > together. > > In general, it might be a good idea if people replying to this thread > put their IRC nicks (if they have one) by their names at the bottom of > the email. > > I agree that this process is confusing, but feel it reflects the > confusing nature of the problems in the team. I think you hit upon one > of the reasons we urgently need to resolve these problems: the > complexity of working within the existing
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Jono Bacon wrote: > > I just want to clarify my original question as there was a little > confusion reported to me earlier: I am asking whether you feel that the > leadership process is required at all. If you feel the team would > benefit from having that process in place, vote with +1, if you feel > that the team is running just fine without it, vote -1. > My vote: -1 We do need a leadership process. I'm not voting against having one, but like most of the -1 votes here, I can't completely agree with the current proposal. We need a more elaborate decision-making process; one that'd be more than just a way of electing a "dictator" to make all the decisions for next one year. To avoid re-typing what's already been said, I mostly agree with DarkwingDuck, jdeslip and rww. Also, why wait for another year? The change has been long awaited. -- Aaditya http://www.dragonsblaze.com/ -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
On 03/09/2010 02:31 PM, Robert Wall wrote: > -1. While I'm glad that we've gotten to the point that we can sanely > have this discussion, I disagree with Jono's proposal for similar > reasons to David and Jack: > > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:24 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ > wrote: >> This is why I feel this course of action is like a very small band-aid >> to a larger problem. What should be done is a set of bylaws on how to >> deal with issues, leadership and how to conduct business. Changing >> leaders will not solve this issue. > > This proposal does little to address the root issues this team has, > and opens us up to some huge possible pitfalls: > > A) It does not define what the responsibilities of the team leader > are, how decisions are made within the team, or what should happen if > the team leader has a conflict of interest and thus can't participate > in a decision. > > B) It does not describe desperately-needed processes for dispute > resolution. This team has issues that have been unresolved for... > what, a year now?... because we do not have anything in place to look > at them and make a final decision. Disputes are going to happen. > Sometimes, they'll involve the team's leader. Even if you rotate the > team's leader, there are very few people on this team that I've never > heard disagree with someone, and they probably would once given the > stress of power ;) > > C) This team does not have a defined membership population. In > Ubuntu-in-general, the people who get to vote for stuff are Ubuntu > Members. They have to go through a process to get to be one. It's thus > difficult for someone to manipulate Ubuntu elections by ballot > stuffing or getting their friends (who don't do anything LoCo-related) > to sign up and vote the way they want, or create multiple accounts, > or... yeah, you get the idea. > > In the LoCo, the only barrier to participation that I can think of is > that the Launchpad group requires approval to get into, which > currently (as I understand it; this isn't written down formally afaik) > consists of me, Neal, or Nathan asking 1) Does your account profile > consist of spam links to foreign drug sites?, 2) Does it look like > you're just joining teams to collect shiny group icons? Not exactly a > high barrier to entry. There is nothing saying who does and does not > have enough team contribution or team association to be able to vote. > Saying "everyone" is not an acceptable solution, because as I've said, > it leaves us wide open to abuse. > > This is an issue in other elections, like the Ubuntu IRC Council > election that happened recently. In that case, leaders were picked by > the Community Council, not voted on by the general IRC population. > That is, as far as I'm aware, the regular way to deal with this > situation in Ubuntu. I'm not necessarily saying it's a good idea in > this case, but it (and the issues I raised above) deserve > consideration. > > D) Voting once a year would likely *increase*, rather than decrease, > the politics and other stupidity that happens on a regular basis on > this team. There's enough bickering already without adding the > additional motive of "If I win this small victory, I'll look better > next year when I try for leadership!". > > I was going to spend longer thinking about this, but the large number > of +1 convinced me that I should probably not postpone it so the > people who don't spend absurd amounts of time thinking about things > like this wouldn't get swept up in the positiveness. Now that I check > my email this morning, I see others have already broken the trend for > me, but anyway :) > > As for what others have said already: > > Akkana: > I have problems figuring that mapping out too, actually. I generally > look for their Launchpad page (which often has IRC nick and realname), > or ask in PM, apologizing for my bad memory. If that's too direct, > feel free to PM me (rww) if I'm around and we can try to figure it out > together. > > In general, it might be a good idea if people replying to this thread > put their IRC nicks (if they have one) by their names at the bottom of > the email. > > I agree that this process is confusing, but feel it reflects the > confusing nature of the problems in the team. I think you hit upon one > of the reasons we urgently need to resolve these problems: the > complexity of working within the existing team is likely turning away > newcomers to the team. > > David: > I disagree with your characterization of the issues; I don't think > it's a NorCal-SoCal split so much as a difference in individual > opinions. I do, however, agree with your assertion that we need bylaws > to deal with issues, and that simply changing leaders will not solve > our problems. > > Jack: > I agree with you that a set of bylaws would go a long way towards > fixing the problems I outlined above. I agree with most of your > proposal, though as I mentioned above, I have reservations about using
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
-1. While I'm glad that we've gotten to the point that we can sanely have this discussion, I disagree with Jono's proposal for similar reasons to David and Jack: On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:24 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ wrote: > This is why I feel this course of action is like a very small band-aid > to a larger problem. What should be done is a set of bylaws on how to > deal with issues, leadership and how to conduct business. Changing > leaders will not solve this issue. This proposal does little to address the root issues this team has, and opens us up to some huge possible pitfalls: A) It does not define what the responsibilities of the team leader are, how decisions are made within the team, or what should happen if the team leader has a conflict of interest and thus can't participate in a decision. B) It does not describe desperately-needed processes for dispute resolution. This team has issues that have been unresolved for... what, a year now?... because we do not have anything in place to look at them and make a final decision. Disputes are going to happen. Sometimes, they'll involve the team's leader. Even if you rotate the team's leader, there are very few people on this team that I've never heard disagree with someone, and they probably would once given the stress of power ;) C) This team does not have a defined membership population. In Ubuntu-in-general, the people who get to vote for stuff are Ubuntu Members. They have to go through a process to get to be one. It's thus difficult for someone to manipulate Ubuntu elections by ballot stuffing or getting their friends (who don't do anything LoCo-related) to sign up and vote the way they want, or create multiple accounts, or... yeah, you get the idea. In the LoCo, the only barrier to participation that I can think of is that the Launchpad group requires approval to get into, which currently (as I understand it; this isn't written down formally afaik) consists of me, Neal, or Nathan asking 1) Does your account profile consist of spam links to foreign drug sites?, 2) Does it look like you're just joining teams to collect shiny group icons? Not exactly a high barrier to entry. There is nothing saying who does and does not have enough team contribution or team association to be able to vote. Saying "everyone" is not an acceptable solution, because as I've said, it leaves us wide open to abuse. This is an issue in other elections, like the Ubuntu IRC Council election that happened recently. In that case, leaders were picked by the Community Council, not voted on by the general IRC population. That is, as far as I'm aware, the regular way to deal with this situation in Ubuntu. I'm not necessarily saying it's a good idea in this case, but it (and the issues I raised above) deserve consideration. D) Voting once a year would likely *increase*, rather than decrease, the politics and other stupidity that happens on a regular basis on this team. There's enough bickering already without adding the additional motive of "If I win this small victory, I'll look better next year when I try for leadership!". I was going to spend longer thinking about this, but the large number of +1 convinced me that I should probably not postpone it so the people who don't spend absurd amounts of time thinking about things like this wouldn't get swept up in the positiveness. Now that I check my email this morning, I see others have already broken the trend for me, but anyway :) As for what others have said already: Akkana: I have problems figuring that mapping out too, actually. I generally look for their Launchpad page (which often has IRC nick and realname), or ask in PM, apologizing for my bad memory. If that's too direct, feel free to PM me (rww) if I'm around and we can try to figure it out together. In general, it might be a good idea if people replying to this thread put their IRC nicks (if they have one) by their names at the bottom of the email. I agree that this process is confusing, but feel it reflects the confusing nature of the problems in the team. I think you hit upon one of the reasons we urgently need to resolve these problems: the complexity of working within the existing team is likely turning away newcomers to the team. David: I disagree with your characterization of the issues; I don't think it's a NorCal-SoCal split so much as a difference in individual opinions. I do, however, agree with your assertion that we need bylaws to deal with issues, and that simply changing leaders will not solve our problems. Jack: I agree with you that a set of bylaws would go a long way towards fixing the problems I outlined above. I agree with most of your proposal, though as I mentioned above, I have reservations about using Launchpad membership as a definition of who is eligible to vote. I also dislike the focus on peoples' regions, as it would tend to further the image that we have North California vs. South California battles. Thanks for the replies
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
Hi all, I generally agree with what DW said (though the characterization of the SoCal/NoCal mentality may be a bit simplified...). I have always been of the opinion that the issues and personal problems in this group derive from a lack of a well-defined and fair structure/by-laws. A couple months back, I documented what I thought the root problem was and created a proposed structure to address them. I did not submit it to the group in deference for the ongoing process between Neal, Grant and Jono; though I thought this process mostly hopelessly mired in fixing ill-effects instead of the root cause of trouble. However, I find Jono's email from yesterday to begin to address the root cause (the lack of well-defined structure) of our problems. I think his proposed leadership model would ensure equality in the group (everyone gets to vote) and define a clear path towards leadership for those wishing to bring change to the group. The model, coupled with a some simple by-laws defining membership, the role of the leader and how decisions are made locally and statewide would in my opinion go a long way towards solving the structural and personal problems in the group. Here is the link to my document mentioned above for the record: http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVvuU9dbI-YnZGhtOWh6cHZfNDNmNzRoaDNkdw&hl=en - I hope the forward illustrates why the problems in the group derive from the lack of structure. I am by no means attached to the particular details of the proposal in this document. It is simply an example. I think supplementing Jono's proposed leadership structure with some sort of by-laws would certainly be sufficient - without the need for council member from each area. If it is not clear, this email and the google-document represent my opinions only and not those of other NoCal members. -Jack On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:24 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ < ubu...@darkwingduck.org> wrote: > On 03/09/2010 07:58 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ wrote: > > On 03/09/2010 12:44 AM, Jono Bacon wrote: > >> Hi All, > >> > >> I just want to clarify my original question as there was a little > >> confusion reported to me earlier: I am asking whether you feel that the > >> leadership process is required at all. If you feel the team would > >> benefit from having that process in place, vote with +1, if you feel > >> that the team is running just fine without it, vote -1. > >> > >> Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, all! > >> > >> Jono > >> > > > > -1 > > > > For my reasons feel free to email me. > > > > DW > > > > There have been a lot of questions about my vote. I figured that it > would be more productive to reply with my reasons here. > > The issues in the group stem from a leadership style that Neal (Flannel) > has. The issues have brought up a lot of controversy with the northern > group. Grant (Grantbow) is one of the people that have brought the > issues to light. It's a philosophy issue between how those in NorCal > think and deal with problems vice those in SoCal. > > SoCal thinking has a way of saying "Problems will take care of > themselves." The NorCal thinking is "Deal with the problem ASAP, fix it > and move on." This is where you can break down the issue. My problem is > that when/if a change of power takes place the issue of philosophy will > not change. If someone from NorCal takes over then the issue still > remains as those from SoCal will stir that we are spending too much time > focused on the problems and not enough on what a LoCo should do. > > This is why I feel this course of action is like a very small band-aid > to a larger problem. What should be done is a set of bylaws on how to > deal with issues, leadership and how to conduct business. Changing > leaders will not solve this issue. > > DW > > > -- > Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list > Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca > -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
+1 On 3/8/2010 9:23 PM, Jono Bacon wrote: > Hi All, > > To those of you who don't know me, I am Jono Bacon and I am the Ubuntu > Community Manager, now residing in the Easy Bay in sunny California. :-) > > Aside from just being part of the team, I have also been helping to > resolve some conflict that has been happening in the team. I have had > some calls with Neal and Grant and spoken to many of you to gather your > input about the team and this conflict. > > Today I had a conference call with Neal and Grant and both identified > that a key issue is that sometimes unresolved issues are left open and > not resolved. Typically in most LoCo teams in these scenarios the leader > will help unblock and bring closure to these issues. While Neal is the > leader Ubuntu California, there was some uncertaintly in our call as to > how formally recognized this is. > > I made a suggestion in the call, but Grant, Neal and I all agreed that > we should not move forward with the suggestion without gathering > feedback from the team as to whether it is needed. As such, I would like > to ask each of you to provide feedback on the following suggestion - > some of you will want to mail me your feedback privately, and some will > be happy to reply to the list. Whatever method you choose: please > summarize *your* view, and not the view of someone who has asked you to > provide feedback one way or the other. The aim of this is for me to get > a barometer of opinion for this proposal. > > This is it: > > I recommend we have a leadership appoint process that works like this: > > * With Neal already the leader of the team, starting from April >1st 2010 he would start a formally recognized one year term of >leadership (he would be grandfathered in). > * In March 2011 a leadership appointment process will happen >that works like this: >o there will be an invitation for people to nominate > themselves for leadership. There will be a standard wiki > template used for people to produce their case for > leadership and others will provide testimonials. >o a meeting will be scheduled and nominations will be > discussed, there will then be a vote using a voting tool > to identify the leader. >o if there is a draw or some conflict surrounding the > vote, the LoCo Council will evaluate the case and pick a > leader. > > What do you think? Please vote with: > > * +1 - you agree with the above proposal. > * -1 - you disagree with the above proposal. > > Again, feel free to provide feedback privately to me or publicly on the > list. > > Thanks! > > Jono > > -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
On 03/09/2010 07:58 AM, David Wondelry ~DarkwingDuck~ wrote: > On 03/09/2010 12:44 AM, Jono Bacon wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> I just want to clarify my original question as there was a little >> confusion reported to me earlier: I am asking whether you feel that the >> leadership process is required at all. If you feel the team would >> benefit from having that process in place, vote with +1, if you feel >> that the team is running just fine without it, vote -1. >> >> Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, all! >> >> Jono >> > > -1 > > For my reasons feel free to email me. > > DW > There have been a lot of questions about my vote. I figured that it would be more productive to reply with my reasons here. The issues in the group stem from a leadership style that Neal (Flannel) has. The issues have brought up a lot of controversy with the northern group. Grant (Grantbow) is one of the people that have brought the issues to light. It's a philosophy issue between how those in NorCal think and deal with problems vice those in SoCal. SoCal thinking has a way of saying "Problems will take care of themselves." The NorCal thinking is "Deal with the problem ASAP, fix it and move on." This is where you can break down the issue. My problem is that when/if a change of power takes place the issue of philosophy will not change. If someone from NorCal takes over then the issue still remains as those from SoCal will stir that we are spending too much time focused on the problems and not enough on what a LoCo should do. This is why I feel this course of action is like a very small band-aid to a larger problem. What should be done is a set of bylaws on how to deal with issues, leadership and how to conduct business. Changing leaders will not solve this issue. DW -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
Jono Bacon writes: > Hi All, > > I just want to clarify my original question as there was a little > confusion reported to me earlier: I am asking whether you feel that the > leadership process is required at all. If you feel the team would > benefit from having that process in place, vote with +1, if you feel > that the team is running just fine without it, vote -1. > > Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, all! Now I'm even more confused than I was before. I thought we were voting on keeping the current setup for a year, then letting the team vote on leadership after that. Now you clarify we're voting on whether to have formal leadership at all, ever. That seems very different from what you said in the first message. As a relative newcomer I don't know what all these smouldering issues are or even who a lot of the people are (you know, it would be really helpful to have a page somewhere that mapped IRC nicks to real names, or for folks on IRC in leadership positions to set their realnames). So I probably should stay out of the vote anyway, but I have to say this process is confusing. ...Akkana -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
On 03/09/2010 12:44 AM, Jono Bacon wrote: > Hi All, > > I just want to clarify my original question as there was a little > confusion reported to me earlier: I am asking whether you feel that the > leadership process is required at all. If you feel the team would > benefit from having that process in place, vote with +1, if you feel > that the team is running just fine without it, vote -1. > > Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, all! > > Jono > -1 For my reasons feel free to email me. DW -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
It seem that this particular situation requires a leadership process, and the one proposed is sound. +1 Larry Cafiero On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Jono Bacon wrote: > Hi All, > > I just want to clarify my original question as there was a little > confusion reported to me earlier: I am asking whether you feel that the > leadership process is required at all. If you feel the team would > benefit from having that process in place, vote with +1, if you feel > that the team is running just fine without it, vote -1. > > Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, all! > > Jono > > -- > Jono Bacon > Ubuntu Community Manager > www.ubuntu.com / www.jonobacon.org > www.identi.ca/jonobacon www.twitter.com/jonobacon > > > -- > Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list > Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca > -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
Hi All, I just want to clarify my original question as there was a little confusion reported to me earlier: I am asking whether you feel that the leadership process is required at all. If you feel the team would benefit from having that process in place, vote with +1, if you feel that the team is running just fine without it, vote -1. Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, all! Jono -- Jono Bacon Ubuntu Community Manager www.ubuntu.com / www.jonobacon.org www.identi.ca/jonobacon www.twitter.com/jonobacon -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
> * +1 - you agree with the above proposal. +1 Jono, thank you for taking the time to work with us and outline this process. I hope everyone takes a moment to expresses their opinion to Jono privately or on the list. Grant Bowman https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CaliforniaTeam -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
Seems fair to me. +1 On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 21:23 -0800, Jono Bacon wrote: > Hi All, > > To those of you who don't know me, I am Jono Bacon and I am the Ubuntu > Community Manager, now residing in the Easy Bay in sunny California. :-) > > Aside from just being part of the team, I have also been helping to > resolve some conflict that has been happening in the team. I have had > some calls with Neal and Grant and spoken to many of you to gather your > input about the team and this conflict. > > Today I had a conference call with Neal and Grant and both identified > that a key issue is that sometimes unresolved issues are left open and > not resolved. Typically in most LoCo teams in these scenarios the leader > will help unblock and bring closure to these issues. While Neal is the > leader Ubuntu California, there was some uncertaintly in our call as to > how formally recognized this is. > > I made a suggestion in the call, but Grant, Neal and I all agreed that > we should not move forward with the suggestion without gathering > feedback from the team as to whether it is needed. As such, I would like > to ask each of you to provide feedback on the following suggestion - > some of you will want to mail me your feedback privately, and some will > be happy to reply to the list. Whatever method you choose: please > summarize *your* view, and not the view of someone who has asked you to > provide feedback one way or the other. The aim of this is for me to get > a barometer of opinion for this proposal. > > This is it: > > I recommend we have a leadership appoint process that works like this: > > * With Neal already the leader of the team, starting from April > 1st 2010 he would start a formally recognized one year term of > leadership (he would be grandfathered in). > * In March 2011 a leadership appointment process will happen > that works like this: > o there will be an invitation for people to nominate > themselves for leadership. There will be a standard wiki > template used for people to produce their case for > leadership and others will provide testimonials. > o a meeting will be scheduled and nominations will be > discussed, there will then be a vote using a voting tool > to identify the leader. > o if there is a draw or some conflict surrounding the > vote, the LoCo Council will evaluate the case and pick a > leader. > > What do you think? Please vote with: > > * +1 - you agree with the above proposal. > * -1 - you disagree with the above proposal. > > Again, feel free to provide feedback privately to me or publicly on the > list. > > Thanks! > > Jono > > -- > Jono Bacon > Ubuntu Community Manager > www.ubuntu.com / www.jonobacon.org > www.identi.ca/jonobacon www.twitter.com/jonobacon > > -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
+1 for me. -Original Message- Date: Monday, March 08, 2010 9:23:43 pm To: ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com From: "Jono Bacon" Subject: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process Hi All, To those of you who don't know me, I am Jono Bacon and I am the Ubuntu Community Manager, now residing in the Easy Bay in sunny California. :-) Aside from just being part of the team, I have also been helping to resolve some conflict that has been happening in the team. I have had some calls with Neal and Grant and spoken to many of you to gather your input about the team and this conflict. Today I had a conference call with Neal and Grant and both identified that a key issue is that sometimes unresolved issues are left open and not resolved. Typically in most LoCo teams in these scenarios the leader will help unblock and bring closure to these issues. While Neal is the leader Ubuntu California, there was some uncertaintly in our call as to how formally recognized this is. I made a suggestion in the call, but Grant, Neal and I all agreed that we should not move forward with the suggestion without gathering feedback from the team as to whether it is needed. As such, I -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
hi, On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Jono Bacon wrote: >* +1 - you agree with the above proposal. > +1 -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
[Ubuntu-US-CA] Asking For Opinion: Leadership Appointment Process
Hi All, To those of you who don't know me, I am Jono Bacon and I am the Ubuntu Community Manager, now residing in the Easy Bay in sunny California. :-) Aside from just being part of the team, I have also been helping to resolve some conflict that has been happening in the team. I have had some calls with Neal and Grant and spoken to many of you to gather your input about the team and this conflict. Today I had a conference call with Neal and Grant and both identified that a key issue is that sometimes unresolved issues are left open and not resolved. Typically in most LoCo teams in these scenarios the leader will help unblock and bring closure to these issues. While Neal is the leader Ubuntu California, there was some uncertaintly in our call as to how formally recognized this is. I made a suggestion in the call, but Grant, Neal and I all agreed that we should not move forward with the suggestion without gathering feedback from the team as to whether it is needed. As such, I would like to ask each of you to provide feedback on the following suggestion - some of you will want to mail me your feedback privately, and some will be happy to reply to the list. Whatever method you choose: please summarize *your* view, and not the view of someone who has asked you to provide feedback one way or the other. The aim of this is for me to get a barometer of opinion for this proposal. This is it: I recommend we have a leadership appoint process that works like this: * With Neal already the leader of the team, starting from April 1st 2010 he would start a formally recognized one year term of leadership (he would be grandfathered in). * In March 2011 a leadership appointment process will happen that works like this: o there will be an invitation for people to nominate themselves for leadership. There will be a standard wiki template used for people to produce their case for leadership and others will provide testimonials. o a meeting will be scheduled and nominations will be discussed, there will then be a vote using a voting tool to identify the leader. o if there is a draw or some conflict surrounding the vote, the LoCo Council will evaluate the case and pick a leader. What do you think? Please vote with: * +1 - you agree with the above proposal. * -1 - you disagree with the above proposal. Again, feel free to provide feedback privately to me or publicly on the list. Thanks! Jono -- Jono Bacon Ubuntu Community Manager www.ubuntu.com / www.jonobacon.org www.identi.ca/jonobacon www.twitter.com/jonobacon -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-us-ca
