Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] LoCo Contact Forwards
On 10/1/09 4:29 PM, Amber Graner wrote: > NC team just forwards them because if we try to hold them until some > later time, people forget and it never gets out. So we just forward > them as is when they come in and let people on the list decide how they > can best use the information. If something from the forward needs to be > discussed someone just adds it to the wiki. I'd agree with this stance. Honestly, I appreciate those forwards. That being said I am not an active member of the group and will therefore abstain from participating in most of the other topics being discussed in this thread. Regards, Ilan Rabinovitch i...@fonz.net -- 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] LoCo Contact Forwards
I think that Robert and Neal and Nathan should give up their leadership role in this organization and this list for a period of time, maybe 4 or 5 months or so, and let someone else come forward and do what they have been doing. This is not to say that Robert or Neal or Nathan are bad people, but I think that it will add to the legitimacy of the leadership of this group if the leadership is rotated a bit. This group seems to have been at an impasse for a while, and so maybe Robert and Neal and Nathan should take a short breather for a while and let someone else be in charge. I think that if Robert and Neal and Nathan did voluntarily take a step back, they would probably see that the group's esteem of them would jump up markedly just for the mere fact that they had the strength of character and courage to relinquish power for a short term. c u -- 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] LoCo Contact Forwards
Robert et. al., I hope you do read this email... While I think you are right that a lot of what has been sent back and forth on the mailing list (and despite your best efforts apparently in multiple private conversations between the three 'decision makers' on this issue as well as among yourself, Grant and Neal) is no more than drama about particular instances. However, the underlying push towards a more structured group with a guarantee of equality for all members (founder included) is absolutely not drama. It is something that needs to be worked out for many people to feel comfortable contributing to the group without hesitation and to provide continuity and security for the organization. I find it incredibly difficult to get excited about participating further in a group where I am unsure who, at the end of the day, has control over my contributions and one in which I have no assurance that I am an equal member (or could ever grow to be and equal member) in the organisation, in the sense of making decisions, resolving conflicts and choosing leadership directions. We are already a large group, representing a State bigger than many countries, and it is time we got a structure fit for managing that type of membership and area. I absolutely think that this is the root cause of the groups problems, and not a symptom. Until we come up with some sort of constitution that gives people the assurance of a fair, equal and democratic (or republican) treatment and consideration of their contributions, the group is just going to get sicklier. Some may see this email as simply adding to the “drama,” since I am undoubtedly a good personal friend of Grant, as almost everybody who has worked with him is. I am, however, sure that everyone who knows and works with Neal can insure me (who still has not had the pleasure of meeting Neal in person) that he is likewise easy to get along with and quite a swell dude. He is also in no small way deserving of the current leadership role he maintains and has, in general, done a kick ass job guiding the group. But for the health and growth of the group, I think it is important to define a more general structure at this point. The issue between Grant and Neal is, thus, not about who is a better person or who is right or wrong. What I see is a case of “two members arguing.” Which is more or less common and healthy in any group. The problem I see is that one of those two people apparently holds the power in the group – enough to censor the others' messages to the list and contributions to the wiki. This seems unfair, undemocratic and not indicative of a robust and well thought-out structure for the LoCo. And, it makes me very uncomfortable. In my opinion, Robert, the “drama” is the particular argument at hand, but the creation of a group structure guaranteeing fairness and equality - that's not drama; thats something that needs to get done. And, undoubtedly, most of the decisions individuals complain about now will not be overturned, but at least those individuals will know that the decisions were based on a fair examination of their contributions by equals. -Jack On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Robert Wall wrote: > I'm replying to the parts of this directed at me. > > On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 11:01 -0700, Grant Bowman wrote: > > Robert, I talk with you approximately every other week in person for > > several hours at www.dvlug.org and you have not to my recollection > > brought this up, and certainly not "recently." I'm baffled at what > > Neal represents is your current stance on this issue. > > The last time you forwarded something here was Wednesday, which I note > is after the last time I saw you in person. I have not had any chance to > discuss anything with you in real time since then. As far as your > bafflement goes, 1) Neal did not misrepresent my stance, 2) my reply to > your private email to me yesterday makes that abundantly clear: > > On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 01:55 -0700, Robert Wall wrote: > > Neal asked us what we thought about your forwarded emails. We agreed > > that it isn't really appropriate for you to forward emails directly > > from loco-contacts, as I believe Neal has explained to you already. > > Since contacting you about it privately and asking you to stop did not > > yield a useful response from you, and you in fact continued, we agreed > > that moderation is necessary until you discuss it further. > > If you didn't understand part of it, I would have expected your next > private emails to me to ask me a question about it, but they didn't. > > If I had a problem with Neal's representation of my opinion, I would > obviously have posted to the list about it. I'm not in the habit of > sending "Me too" emails, because I see them as a waste of everyone's > time. > > > The time spent on this new issue has also been significant. > > Yes, it has, and I have better things to do than engage in this sort of > politics. Good luck to whichever one of y'all next tries
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] LoCo Contact Forwards
I'm replying to the parts of this directed at me. On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 11:01 -0700, Grant Bowman wrote: > Robert, I talk with you approximately every other week in person for > several hours at www.dvlug.org and you have not to my recollection > brought this up, and certainly not "recently." I'm baffled at what > Neal represents is your current stance on this issue. The last time you forwarded something here was Wednesday, which I note is after the last time I saw you in person. I have not had any chance to discuss anything with you in real time since then. As far as your bafflement goes, 1) Neal did not misrepresent my stance, 2) my reply to your private email to me yesterday makes that abundantly clear: On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 01:55 -0700, Robert Wall wrote: > Neal asked us what we thought about your forwarded emails. We agreed > that it isn't really appropriate for you to forward emails directly > from loco-contacts, as I believe Neal has explained to you already. > Since contacting you about it privately and asking you to stop did not > yield a useful response from you, and you in fact continued, we agreed > that moderation is necessary until you discuss it further. If you didn't understand part of it, I would have expected your next private emails to me to ask me a question about it, but they didn't. If I had a problem with Neal's representation of my opinion, I would obviously have posted to the list about it. I'm not in the habit of sending "Me too" emails, because I see them as a waste of everyone's time. > The time spent on this new issue has also been significant. Yes, it has, and I have better things to do than engage in this sort of politics. Good luck to whichever one of y'all next tries to figure out how to fix this team, because you'll need it. I will be ignoring further messages (from anyone) about these issues and whichever ones pop up in the future, because it is evident that my involvement in all this has yet to help. I'll continue my various responsibilities in this team, including list moderation, but am going to be making every effort to stay out of the way of this team's drama, because I am sick and tired of it. Attending meetings, going to events? Yes. Getting involved when said meetings get dramatic? No. Reading the next drama thread that pops up on here? Also no. What's that quote? "I am because we are"? Well, right now I am very, very tired of all this. ~ Robert -- Robert Wall rob...@rww.name Webpage http://rww.name/ GPG key 0x0CBC1491 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- 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] LoCo Contact Forwards
Thank you Elizabeth, Jack, Christian and Amber for speaking out against this action. I'll start again with the original "private" censure message. This has set the stage for discussion in a specific way that is highly questionable. On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Neal Bussett wrote: > We recently discussed your tendency to forward everything from -contacts > to -us-ca, and how it's not a good policy to have. OK, let's break this sentence down. First of all "we" is Neal, Nathan and Robert in private, right? This is not specifically "Neal and Grant" and I saw no mention of this in #ubuntu-california though I monitor it using two machines now. I have seen no other communication attempts. Neal and I have certainly not discussed this recently though I always welcome genuine opportunities for discussion. Neal, when was this "other day" that you refer to in your reply? In fact, this week in private email I addressed a range of LoCo topics but forwarding email from loco-contacts was not included in any way. The language used in this first sentence immediately polarizes the discussion into an "us and them." Robert, I talk with you approximately every other week in person for several hours at www.dvlug.org and you have not to my recollection brought this up, and certainly not "recently." I'm baffled at what Neal represents is your current stance on this issue. Nathan, you and I have never discussed this issue in any way to my recollection, certainly not "recently." Do you think censorship creates a "friendly mood to the mailing list"? If you, Neal or Robert care to take the time to rewrite loco-contacts traffic, _please_ do so but I haven't seen any of that from you, Neal or Robert lately nor any mention of loco-contacts subjects brought to this list. The loco contacts are tasked with being a "point of contact" working in both directions. Nathan, "...dismissive and refusing to enter discussion, and hasn't modified his behavior" is simply a lie, especially as you have made no attempts to contact me about this matter in any way at all. By process of elimination, I can only logically conclude in this case that "we" really means Neal who has influenced Nathan and Robert to agree with him without discussing this with me. This is an example that contradicts the statement made last meeting (in more than one way) "20:19:04 < Flannel> erichammond: On a number of occassions, I've specifically held back my comments on an issue precisely because I don't want people to shy away from expressing themselves". I certainly don't "forward everything". I do forward what might be relevant to focused events like Global Jam activities, especially the last one which specifically refers to the Global Jam written by Jono Bacon. Some loco-contacts traffic specifically requests further distribution to LoCo teams. The Global Jam is this week. It is hard to get any more targeted or well timed than that. As we are in the state of California with a *very* diverse population I would hope that some of the targeted languages might be represented by subscribers to our mail list. There certainly are more people on the mail list than have been active in the group so far and I was hoping this new kind of opportunity for involvement might pique the interest of a new contributor. As Neal is our official loco contact I am surprised he has not yet participated in the loco-contacts list discussion prompted from my email [1] yesterday asking for clarification on this "policy." There have been some interesting comments, with a request [2] from Alan Pope "I'd be interested to know what the specific rationale is for _not_ passing loco-contacts mail to locos." I encourage those interested to either read the web archive and/or subscribe to the list. [3] Forwarding email to LoCo lists has also been added to the agenda [4] for the next LoCo Council. Daniel Holbach has also drafted a proposed amendment [5] to the LoCoTeamContact wiki page. [1] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/loco-contacts/2009-October/003681.html Michael Lustfield later summarized "I think the general consensus your receiving is this: 1. You seem to be doing your job correctly 2. Just keep doing what you're doing 3. If this continues to be an issue, please forward specifics so we can see the details and try to understand what exactly happened." [2] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/loco-contacts/2009-October/003686.html [3] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/loco-contacts [4] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoCouncilAgenda [5] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoTeamContact/ProposedAddition > Yesterday and today > you continued in the same manner, so I've set your messages to be > moderated on the mailing list until this can be resolved. > > All of your emails (save these forwards from -contacts) will still get > through, however they'll be delayed until one of the moderators can > approve them. > > This moderation process shouldn't take long normally, so > it should
Re: [Ubuntu-US-CA] LoCo Contact Forwards
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Elizabeth Krumbach wrote: > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Nathan Haines wrote: > > Unfortunately, Grant doesn't tailor these announcements and he gives no > > thought to timing or how these announcements might draw focus away from > > current activities. > > I guess my main problem with this is who decides where the focus is? > I'll stick with the translations example for now, is the really up to > the team leaders to determine whether people should be informed about > a translations push that Jono is doing to all LoCo teams? Maybe it > feels like to you that it's taking away from, for example, planning > the upcoming Jams or release parties, but to someone else who hasn't > been very involved but wants to get into translations it might be a > great entry point for them to start getting involved, especially if > they can't make it out to a jam or release party. Furthermore, if > we're planning Jams and release parties, does this mean we should > refrain from other discussion on-list because it "draws focus away"? > > > Instead, he forwards them along with an FYI, and he > > does so indiscriminately. I feel this creates an unfriendly mood to the > > mailing list. > > There is nothing stopping anyone within the team from replying to the > -contacts forward with a specifically crafted message that engages the > team more, but frequently people don't have the time or expertise to > do this in a timely manner. Based on my experience with other teams, I > think it's more important for the message to get out *at all* rather > than worrying that it's not specifically targeted directly at the > team. A lot of teams do this and it works fine for them, I can provide > examples if you'd like. NC team just forwards them because if we try to hold them until some later time, people forget and it never gets out. So we just forward them as is when they come in and let people on the list decide how they can best use the information. If something from the forward needs to be discussed someone just adds it to the wiki. > > > We are not rejecting any emails other than forwards from -contacts, as > > the approval of his bringing a private email to the list clearly > > indicates. > > I think I'm just troubled by the precedent this sets for the team. > Today we're not allowed to forward -contacts emails (which are emails > specifically crafted for sharing, and sent out by the Community > Manager), what next? How are we supposed to know what is acceptable if > even these official emails from the Community Manager emails aren't? > Amber Graner //akgraner http://amber.redvoodoo.org/ > > -- > Elizabeth Krumbach // Lyz // pleia2 > http://www.princessleia.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 > -- 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] LoCo Contact Forwards
hi, Grant isn't contributing constructively here I spend lots of time working on Ubuntu projects locally with Grant, and I have never known him to be obstreperous or uncooperative. As far as I have known Grant, he is very nice and very cooperative. My experience with him is that he goes out of his way to be nice, and is willing to go to considerable inconvenience and even expense to collaborate on projects. I think that if you find him to be uncooperative, you should probably consider why you have interpreted his behavior to be that way, because it is nothing like the Grant Bowman that I know. I have spent weeks and weeks working with Grant, and I find him to be very easy to get along with. Something should be done to make this list more friendly, but I don't see that something having anything to do with modifying Grant's behavior, frankly. Can we have a more friendly list environment, please? Thanks for considering my request. -- 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] LoCo Contact Forwards
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Nathan Haines wrote: > Unfortunately, Grant doesn't tailor these announcements and he gives no > thought to timing or how these announcements might draw focus away from > current activities. I guess my main problem with this is who decides where the focus is? I'll stick with the translations example for now, is the really up to the team leaders to determine whether people should be informed about a translations push that Jono is doing to all LoCo teams? Maybe it feels like to you that it's taking away from, for example, planning the upcoming Jams or release parties, but to someone else who hasn't been very involved but wants to get into translations it might be a great entry point for them to start getting involved, especially if they can't make it out to a jam or release party. Furthermore, if we're planning Jams and release parties, does this mean we should refrain from other discussion on-list because it "draws focus away"? > Instead, he forwards them along with an FYI, and he > does so indiscriminately. I feel this creates an unfriendly mood to the > mailing list. There is nothing stopping anyone within the team from replying to the -contacts forward with a specifically crafted message that engages the team more, but frequently people don't have the time or expertise to do this in a timely manner. Based on my experience with other teams, I think it's more important for the message to get out *at all* rather than worrying that it's not specifically targeted directly at the team. A lot of teams do this and it works fine for them, I can provide examples if you'd like. > We are not rejecting any emails other than forwards from -contacts, as > the approval of his bringing a private email to the list clearly > indicates. I think I'm just troubled by the precedent this sets for the team. Today we're not allowed to forward -contacts emails (which are emails specifically crafted for sharing, and sent out by the Community Manager), what next? How are we supposed to know what is acceptable if even these official emails from the Community Manager emails aren't? -- Elizabeth Krumbach // Lyz // pleia2 http://www.princessleia.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] LoCo Contact Forwards
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 08:46 -0400, Elizabeth Krumbach wrote: > I don't understand this limitation. Teams are *encouraged* to pass > this information along to their members since the -contacts list is > primarily for the loco organizers. In this particular example, > California (like many states in the country) has a lot of folks who > are willing and able to do translations, so this email is very > on-topic and something that I'm sure a lot of people have forwarded to > their teams. We always hope to pass relevant notices from -contacts along in a way that is specific and tailored for California. California is a rich blend of many cultures, and I can imagine members of the Spanish-, Cambodian-, and German-speaking communities would be extremely valuable to the translation effort, to name a few. Unfortunately, Grant doesn't tailor these announcements and he gives no thought to timing or how these announcements might draw focus away from current activities. Instead, he forwards them along with an FYI, and he does so indiscriminately. I feel this creates an unfriendly mood to the mailing list. > Honestly, this threat and follow-through of moderation makes me very > reluctant to post anything to this list for fear of being reprimanded. > This discouragement of contribution is not good :( Grant isn't contributing constructively here, he's mindlessly forwarding messages and unfortunately, he's been asked in private several times to discuss this practice, and our reasons for wanting a different approach to unceremoniously forwarding emails. He has responded by being dismissive and refusing to enter discussion, and hasn't modified his behavior. As he has been doing this for some time and has continued to be unapproachable, we reluctantly felt we no longer had any choice. We are not rejecting any emails other than forwards from -contacts, as the approval of his bringing a private email to the list clearly indicates. Regards, Nathan -- Nathan Haines Ubuntu California Local Community Team -- 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] LoCo Contact Forwards
Neal, This is getting out of hand. On Oct 1, 2009 12:21 AM, "Neal Bussett" wrote: On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 11:29:58PM -0700, Grant Bowman wrote: > a) Who are the list moderators at th... Nathan, Robert, and myself. > b) How was this decision arrived at? We discussed it, and determined it was an appropriate course of action considering I attempted to discuss it with you the other day, and I was simply stonewalled. > c) Who will determine what "resolved" will be measured by? At this point, I'd be happy with you actually having a reasonable conversation on the matter. Neal Bussett Ubuntu California -- Ubuntu-us-ca mailing list Ubuntu-us-ca@lists.ubuntu.com Modify... -- 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] LoCo Contact Forwards
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 2:29 AM, Grant Bowman wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Neal Bussett wrote: >> We recently discussed your tendency to forward everything from -contacts >> to -us-ca, and how it's not a good policy to have. Yesterday and today >> you continued in the same manner, so I've set your messages to be >> moderated on the mailing list until this can be resolved. I don't understand this limitation. Teams are *encouraged* to pass this information along to their members since the -contacts list is primarily for the loco organizers. In this particular example, California (like many states in the country) has a lot of folks who are willing and able to do translations, so this email is very on-topic and something that I'm sure a lot of people have forwarded to their teams. Honestly, this threat and follow-through of moderation makes me very reluctant to post anything to this list for fear of being reprimanded. This discouragement of contribution is not good :( -- Elizabeth Krumbach // Lyz // pleia2 http://www.princessleia.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] LoCo Contact Forwards
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 11:29:58PM -0700, Grant Bowman wrote: > a) Who are the list moderators at this time? Nathan, Robert, and myself. > b) How was this decision arrived at? We discussed it, and determined it was an appropriate course of action considering I attempted to discuss it with you the other day, and I was simply stonewalled. > c) Who will determine what "resolved" will be measured by? At this point, I'd be happy with you actually having a reasonable conversation on the matter. Neal Bussett Ubuntu California -- 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] LoCo Contact Forwards
Neal, I have three questions that I feel deserve public answers. a) Who are the list moderators at this time? b) How was this decision arrived at? c) Who will determine what "resolved" will be measured by? Grant Bowman https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CaliforniaTeam On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Neal Bussett wrote: > Hi Grant, > > We recently discussed your tendency to forward everything from -contacts > to -us-ca, and how it's not a good policy to have. Yesterday and today > you continued in the same manner, so I've set your messages to be > moderated on the mailing list until this can be resolved. > > All of your emails (save these forwards from -contacts) will still get > through, however they'll be delayed until one of the moderators can > approve them. This moderation process shouldn't take long normally, so > it shouldn't affect your ability to participate. > > Neal Bussett > Ubuntu California > -- 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
