|
Grex > Coop13 > #370: Nominations for the 2007 Grex Board of Directors | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 236 responses total. |
nharmon
|
|
response 116 of 236:
| 
Dec 26 21:20 UTC 2006 |
Some of us feel that Grex's biggest problem is apathy and a general
comfort with the status quo.
|
mary
|
|
response 117 of 236:
|
Dec 26 21:36 UTC 2006 |
It's not apathy.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 118 of 236:
|
Dec 26 21:42 UTC 2006 |
resp:114 dictatorial? You mean like demanding a decision made or else
you were going to leave and never come back?
(the adult in my is still on vacation, and the child is wandering
through Grex.)
|
spooked
|
|
response 119 of 236:
|
Dec 27 00:14 UTC 2006 |
There's a few people who need a match lit up; the hardware is a lot more
diligent, responsive, and visionary than those individuals.
If you mate with them, the shit tastes like caviar.
|
cross
|
|
response 120 of 236:
|
Dec 27 02:03 UTC 2006 |
Regarding #117; Then what is it?
I'm with Nate.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 121 of 236:
|
Dec 27 02:33 UTC 2006 |
There's often a fine line between merely being comfortable with the
status quo- and demanding change merely for the sake of change.
Sometimes change is good, sometimes it's not necessary.
For the layman it's sometimes hard to tell what side of the line some of
you "WE MUST CHANGE" types are on.
|
cross
|
|
response 122 of 236:
|
Dec 27 02:36 UTC 2006 |
True.
|
spooked
|
|
response 123 of 236:
|
Dec 27 06:21 UTC 2006 |
You don't "have to" change, but if Grex wants to move forward (and I'm
seriously doubting that) then big changes have to take place, because the
current processes have totally screwed the production line and it cannot
keep good people enthusiastically particpating in staffing it (note, this
does NOT include symbolicly staffing it, either).
If you think geez Grex must be great because of its balance sheet -- you're
a moron. Most of Grex's shallow bank account stays propped up because of
large one-off occasional generous donors. The question you should be
asking is if Grex was financially sound (and it is not) is what services
or give backs has/is it providing to the user/community base. You only
need to log onto freeshell.org and know half a degree or two about
Unix/bbs/conferencing to see Grex is well over a decade behind and
falling further and further behind every second.
It's sad enough that Grex is in the position it is in. What's even more
tragic is that supposedly responsible/intelligent/caring Grex-folk think
it is all lovely and snuggly.
|
remmers
|
|
response 124 of 236:
|
Dec 27 14:02 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 125 of 236:
|
Dec 27 15:04 UTC 2006 |
resp:123 I don't think Grex is great because of the balance sheet, I
think Grex is great because of the community of people here. I've always
thought that one of Grex's main purposes in being was the formation of
community.
Also- I DO think changes need to be made- however, your insulting and
negative mode of arguing doesn't convince me that the MAJOR CHANGES
you're suggesting are really the best course of action.
I would like to see e-mail restored for all users, I would like to see
newuser reopened so we can GET newusers. The RAID array conversation is
an interesting one and I'd like to see that pursued.
Merely slamming current staff and the members of Grex doesn't really
propel anything but ire forward, now does it?
|
mary
|
|
response 126 of 236:
|
Dec 27 15:19 UTC 2006 |
Nice, Anne.
|
slynne
|
|
response 127 of 236:
|
Dec 27 15:24 UTC 2006 |
What I get most out of grex is the community thing. It would be
fabulous if we could get some new people here. Right now, of course, we
do have some technical problems in that area what with newuser being
turned off and such. But as Anne points out there are also some other
problems that arent technical in nature and those are just as
important.
|
tod
|
|
response 128 of 236:
|
Dec 27 18:21 UTC 2006 |
No major changes. No complaining. Keep your heads down and stop making
waves. Business as usual. Drink the Kool-Aid.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 129 of 236:
|
Dec 27 20:28 UTC 2006 |
resp:128 Todd, are you suggesting that ALL change is good? That change
purely to change is what we should be striving for? As I stated- there
are times when change is needed, stagnation can be deadly, however, not
ALL change is good, or to the benefit of the system. If changes aren't
thought about we'll just end up trying to jump in 8 different directions
and blow through what little money Grex DOES have in the bank.
|
slynne
|
|
response 130 of 236:
|
Dec 27 20:48 UTC 2006 |
I totally agree with jadecat on this one. change just for the sake of
change isnt helpful at all. I mean, there are a lot of things that grex
has done right and changing those things wouldnt be helpful at all.
That being said, there are a lot of changes I would like to see.
|
cross
|
|
response 131 of 236:
|
Dec 27 21:42 UTC 2006 |
I agree with slynne. I don't get where people make the conceptual jump
from, ``there are problems'' to ``change for the sake of change.'' Clearly,
there are some things that need to be changed. Among them:
1) Stagnation and apathy within the community. I think this is hard to
guage for people *in* the community, but consider that the membership level
has nearly halved in the past few years. It needs to be asked, ``why is
that?'' Do people perceive that as a problem? If so, is it worth fixing?
If not, why not? If peole are content with the community as it is, why
bother turning on newuser? Is grex supposed to be about an *actively
growing* community, or the same group of people who have always been here?
2) The spam problem and email in general. Grex email, when it works, has
some serious problems. Come on, grex can do better than that.
3) The newuser thing and abuse. Once again, grex can do better than that.
4) The various staff issues. Points (2) and (3) can only be addressed with
the assistance of staff, but there aren't staff resources available to
address them in any real way. I've outlined several ways in which I think
that at least the spam problem can be (partially) addressed (including:
making email opt-in, doing automated verification via paypal and
`sponsorship' of users by members to allow off-site email, putting in spam
and virus filtering), but there's no one on staff with the necessary
combination of time *and* experience to make any of those things happen. Is
this something grex should try and correct? If so, how?
Clearly some long-time users and contributers are disillusioned and
unsatisfied with the direction the system is taking. Instead of just saying
that they're insulting and writing them off, perhaps a better course of
action is to ask *why* they're so frustrated and dissatisfied, and work from
there.
|
tod
|
|
response 132 of 236:
|
Dec 27 23:34 UTC 2006 |
re #129
resp:128 Todd, are you suggesting that ALL change is good?
Is that what I'm saying? Is that what you read from "NO major changes" and
"No complaining" cynicism of mine? Where did I say ALL?
|
spooked
|
|
response 133 of 236:
|
Dec 28 01:19 UTC 2006 |
It's quite sad really. The whole denial.
|
cross
|
|
response 134 of 236:
|
Dec 28 04:13 UTC 2006 |
Regarding #132; Yeah, I really didn't understand that one myself.
Folks, the issue isn't about changing everything because people like change,
it's about making *some* changes (granted, some of which could be major)
because *some* things aren't working. However, it seems like whenever
someone says, ``some things on grex need to change...'' and then voices
frustration that either (a) things aren't changing, or (b) they're changing
at the same historically glacial pace, there's an almost knee-jerk reaction
to come to the defense of the organization and/or community and say that all
is well, why rush things, question people's motivations and/or intent,
lambast the naysayers, ``if it ain't broke, don't fix it...'' and etc. It's
almost as if the perception is of an attack *on the organization*. I think
that the thing that gets lost when people do that, however, is that no one
is necessarily *attacking* the organization, just the state of the
organization at the moment. There's a big difference.
Some people think that grex is great the way it is, and others disagree.
What happened to respecting differing viewpoints and being able to express
one's opinions? At the moment, there are some people who really feel like
grex has some serious problems. In some cases, these are long-time
contributers who have donated their time, money, and energy to this
community over the years. Why don't we give those people the respect of
giving their opinions some consideration, instead of just dismissing them,
which is what *I* perceive to be happening in some (rather notable) cases?
|
spooked
|
|
response 135 of 236:
|
Dec 28 08:55 UTC 2006 |
I have never contributed anything, nor been here long, nor care about
Grex (not to mention that I have no clue about the technical or political
problems - what problems? - on here). It is pretty clear that I just like
making trouble.
|
mary
|
|
response 136 of 236:
|
Dec 28 12:50 UTC 2006 |
Dan, it certainly sounds to this listener like you and Mic are indeed
attacking the organization, especially staff members. They have been
mocked and criticised, had their reputations and volunteer efforts
slammed, and told they are the ruin of Grex. Yuck. These are also
people who are so adult, and basically nice, that they aren't even
fighting back. I suspect their response is to simply try to ignore you.
Obviously, the present climate here isn't one which fosters digging in
and donating even more time and effort. Which feeds the whole vicious
process. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to see a few key volunteers
walk away. And worse yet, the morale here is so doubt off-putting that
it would probably deter any reasonable staff candidate from raising his
or her hand and jumping in.
Yes, Grex has issues that need to be addressed. But trashing our
existing volunteer staff is not the way to get things done. I think
this is the point where we disagree the most. The way to improve Grex
is to get people thinking upbeat and positive about our community, not
to bash and polarize. Identify problems and see them as challenges not
failures. But you know what, it's a whole lot easier to get up on a
soapbox and scream about who is at fault than it is to quietly get
behind a team, ditch ego, develop friendships through respect, and build
a sense of enthusiasm for problem solving.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 137 of 236:
|
Dec 28 14:30 UTC 2006 |
resp:132 Todd, in resp:128 you wrote "No major changes. No
complaining.
Keep your heads down and stop making waves. Business as usual. Drink
the Kool-Aid."
Which was bizarre to me because it followed several posts from people
who were all advocating change! However, they, and myself, were saying
that we want to examine things before we make changes. So yeah, I read
in that cynicism that you think that the current situation is completely
bad and that we need to change everything.
resp:131 your point #1 has actually been the subject of many a
conversation back when I was on the board. It's just that no one ever
really came up with a good way to get new people here. And, am I
completely deluisional here, or was your post resp:122 actually
*agreeing* with my post resp:121 where I explained that sometimes it's
hard to tell the difference between people qho advocate change for the
best of the group, or who merely want to see changes made.
What's killing me here is that sheer number of people who DO think
changes need to be made- and apparently all their comments are
completely overlooked by Cross, Mic and Tod.
There IS an agreement that the way things are right now is not good.
That we DO need to change. Which seems to be getting completely ignored
by some of you. Where there's disagreement is in where we should be
going- what path we should be persuing.
How about we try to continue this conversation without slamming anyone?
Argue for the changes you want to see based on their merit and QUIT
blaming current/previous staff members? If you're idea is so wonderful-
it's merits will tell.
|
slynne
|
|
response 138 of 236:
|
Dec 28 14:37 UTC 2006 |
Well, Dan seems to be willing to join the team as a board member at
least. Hopefully that will be a positive experience for both him *and*
for Grex.
|
tod
|
|
response 139 of 236:
|
Dec 28 16:25 UTC 2006 |
re #137
Well, I don't think things are "completely" bad nor do I think we should
change "everything". I just think that when someone makes a suggestion for
an update to a module that they shouldn't have to endure the wrath of people
that are never participating with co-op unless someone has suggested a
"change". And that participation is something always along the lines of "Let
us consult The Oracle and get back to you." Really, its like the worst union
shop of system admins I've ever dreamed of yet its volunteers and some of
which are willing to actually do the work but aren't being allowed.
|
keesan
|
|
response 140 of 236:
|
Dec 28 17:32 UTC 2006 |
We need to have some way to get things done (put together new hardware, fix
mail, fix newuser, implement a spam filter) in less than a year. Have board
assign a task to a staff member to be done within a certain time and if not
done, assign it to someone else? Ask for non-staff volunteers to help?
Who would want to join a system (assuming new users are ever allowed in again)
where the motd says outgoing mail has been temporarily suspended for a year?
|