|
Grex > Coop8 > #65: Co-op Conference in search of co-fw candidates - one fw spot open. |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
tsty
|
|
Co-op Conference in search of co-fw candidates - one fw spot open.
| 
May 9 09:59 UTC 1996 |
the Co-op coonference is down to one fw, tsty, since nephi resigned as
fw a couple days ago. nephi was an excellent fw and, for one, i'm sad
to see him resign. But Grex goes on.
Co-op Conference should have (imo) two fw particularily
since it seems to be as close to the "Conference of Record" for Grex
as possible. (Grex-tech has now been split off into the Garage.cf and seems
to be be the Technical Conference of Record.)
Co-op is the conference wherein the current and future affairs of
Grex are discussed. For a primer on what is hot, see the Agora Item #57
(linked from Co-op) .... or j coop at any Ok: prompt near you.
I'm starting this item (and linking it to Co-op) for wider distribution
in the search for another fw to work with in Co-op.
Perhaps this item would be worthy of a link to Intro.cf as well.
If you are interested in being a co-fw of Co-op, please indicate such
desire in responses here. And be sure to j coop to find out the
other stuff we are discussing.
|
| 97 responses total. |
popcorn
|
|
response 1 of 97:
|
May 9 14:19 UTC 1996 |
This response has been erased.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 2 of 97:
|
May 9 16:42 UTC 1996 |
I too would like to keep nephi. We love you but we know you won't give us your
beer.
|
omni
|
|
response 3 of 97:
|
May 9 17:29 UTC 1996 |
I would like to be considered.
|
janc
|
|
response 4 of 97:
|
May 9 18:23 UTC 1996 |
I nominate kerouac.
|
remmers
|
|
response 5 of 97:
|
May 9 18:46 UTC 1996 |
I think we should decide how we're going to decide this. Not long
ago (see Item 47), Mary (chelsea) proposed a limited term of two
years for Coop fw's, with the choice among voluteers being made by
vote of coop participants. As I recall the discussion, reaction to
the proposal was mixed but it got a good amount of support. The
proposal stalled when people balked at the idea of applying it
retroactively to the current fw's.
Since we're choosing a new fw, now is the time to decide how we're
going to do it and whether the term will be fixed-length or
indefinite.
|
remmers
|
|
response 6 of 97:
|
May 9 19:12 UTC 1996 |
(Since this is a linked item, I should add that my reference to
"Item 47" refers to 47 in the Coop conference.)
|
brighn
|
|
response 7 of 97:
|
May 9 19:18 UTC 1996 |
a vote,. at any rate, is a good idea
even if it isn't fixed term
|
kerouac
|
|
response 8 of 97:
|
May 9 23:42 UTC 1996 |
why did nephi resign? was it over the login screen?
|
kerouac
|
|
response 9 of 97:
|
May 10 00:30 UTC 1996 |
Having an election, as mary proposed, might make sense now but I'd ask
the same question I asked before, "On what basis does one make a choice for
fair witness"? I'm not sure this could be anything more than a popularity
contest as most issues regarding fw'ing are agreed upon.
I think Tsty shold stay on as sole fw, and when he steps down, should not be
replaced. This is a system conf and the only purpose for an fw is restarts
and cfadmin would end up handling that anyhow. Coop does not need an fw,
it is not a topical conf and does not need someone pushing discussion. In
fact the only problems we've had in coop in recent months were because
that we HAD fair witnesses who were trying to use their authority.
The cfadmin should be the default fw but only for administrative
purposes, otherwise coop doesnt need and shouldnt have any fw's because
its not a conf that at any point is going to need defining or redefining.
\
I dont think it is written anywhere or that anyone has ever said that EVERY
conf needs or should have a fair witness. In many cases it is a good idea
but not in all cases, and in this one I think its time to recognize this.
|
scg
|
|
response 10 of 97:
|
May 10 06:38 UTC 1996 |
Somebody needs to do linking, which is an FW job. Cfadm can link items, but
I can imagine that the cfadms might not want that responsability.
|
arthurp
|
|
response 11 of 97:
|
May 10 10:24 UTC 1996 |
Someone needs to be ready to stop really ugly things if they should come up.
I'm sure cfadmn doesn't want to read every response of every item to make sure
nothing crazy is going on.
|
carson
|
|
response 12 of 97:
|
May 10 12:03 UTC 1996 |
I'm interested.
|
brighn
|
|
response 13 of 97:
|
May 10 14:05 UTC 1996 |
(whoa, and it isn't even in parens. =} i second carson)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 14 of 97:
|
May 10 17:31 UTC 1996 |
A reminder: this is a volunteer operation. Even little jobs should be
given out to volunteers, rather than concentrating a pile of little jobs
in a few hands. Conflicts should be avoided, but having a person "manage"
coop doesn't conflict with any other duty, so it seems to me to be an
ideal volunteer position.
|
omni
|
|
response 15 of 97:
|
May 10 17:42 UTC 1996 |
My f-w style is really hands-off, unless things go really wrong. I try to
keep linking to a minimum unless it's really necessary. I don't think I've
linked 10 items in the last 2 yrs, and even then I was grumbling about it.
;)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 16 of 97:
|
May 10 17:59 UTC 1996 |
I sure support that philosophy! Items should be read in their proper
conferences, rather than all gathered together for someone's convenience
(the exception being "intro", where they just pass through). I do a little
linking - though probably even less than omni - for items that are directly
about the cf topic where I am a fw.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 17 of 97:
|
May 10 18:15 UTC 1996 |
well if coop HAS to have an fw, I guess it should be someone who has
never fw'ed before and would like the chance. Omni and Carson would be
fine but they dont need the experience. With as little work as being
fw in coop requires, it should be an entry level job
|
janc
|
|
response 18 of 97:
|
May 10 19:57 UTC 1996 |
Well, certainly no technical skill is needed, but it should be someone who
has hung around coop long enough to know how it goes, though it need not be
anyone who is particularly vocal (though it can be). I think Richard would
be a good choice. This is certainly a job that does *not* require a local
person, and it'd be nice to have someone other than the same old people in
it.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 19 of 97:
|
May 11 00:09 UTC 1996 |
All good choices. You are blessed, Grex!
|
selena
|
|
response 20 of 97:
|
May 11 00:32 UTC 1996 |
*Selena draws in her breath*
I am seriously interested in Co-FWing this conference with Tsty.
I nominate myself.
|
janc
|
|
response 21 of 97:
|
May 11 00:39 UTC 1996 |
Cool.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 22 of 97:
|
May 11 00:58 UTC 1996 |
*sigh* okay I'll run for fw, but only because I think these other folks
would be too active (particularly Selena who I think would end up killing
poor Tsty) I will run on the "non-involvement" platform, meaning that I view
coop as a system conf and I will promise to only use fw commands to link
an occasional item and at the time of re-starts. I will not freeze items
or kill items unless I am beaten over the head with user requests. And
even then I probably wouldnt. I'm on record as saying that coop
doesnt need any fw's except for re-starts so I'm going to try to be
as invisible as I can. Since I dont live in Michigan and have no
personal involvement with staff or board, I think I might bring a healthy
bit of detachment to this.
And since I said I think this is a good post for a newbie fw, if someone
who has never fw'ed before wants this and is sincere, I will gladly vote
against myself.
Besides if Im the fw, it will give me one less authority person to bitch
at. I might be a kinder, gentler kerouac :) (well maybe)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 23 of 97:
|
May 11 02:21 UTC 1996 |
All good thoughts - except, STOP RESTARTS.
|
carson
|
|
response 24 of 97:
|
May 11 05:25 UTC 1996 |
rolling restarts are much better.
|