response 52 of 357:

Jun 21 00:30 UTC 2010

The board is a group of people who have generously volunteered to help 
(note the word "help") keep the system viable.  They are working with not 
a lot of money, almost no staff, and a group of users who are unwilling to 
consider any change unless it meets their personal preference regardless 
of the bigger picture.  It's sad, really.

Go to your room, Richard, until you can come out and apologize to those 
willing to be your pinata.  Or get on the board yourself and show us how 
it should be done.  

response 54 of 357:

Jun 21 01:48 UTC 2010

I don't know how much money Grex has now, but I quit being a member
because it had a big bankroll and nothing on which to spend money.  The
only purpose for contributing money to Grex under those circumstances is
because you don't want to have it yourself.  I think Grex still has
plenty of money for any conceivable need over quite a few years.

If it has a need for more money, I will send a check.  Grex is valuable
to me, and I will support it as needed.

I haven't voted because I am not a member and so not eligible.  I did
vote a half year ago when longtime users such as myself were invited to
do so.

As for a vision for the future, I like Grex now.  I won't use it if it
becomes anything like Facebook, because I don't enjoy Facebook.  And if
I did, I would spend time there. 

I agree that Grex needs a stronger user base and isn't going to get one
by remaining as it is.  I haven't thought of any changes to the user
interface or functionality which would bring more users in, while
retaining what I like about it now.

I think a lot of what has driven many people away has been the
willingness and ability of conversation snipers such as zulu and lar to
disrupt discussions.  I think they will eventually drive me away, too,
which is why I think it's a reason why others have left.  Grex has held
to it's choice to be "free speech", which really means to retain such as
those at the expense of others who would be more community minded. 
People who won't tolerate that kind of stuff leave, and so the snipers
become more and more prominent.  If that problem had been solved years
ago, I think Grex would be a lot more stable now, and a lot more
interesting.  I don't know if it's too late and I don't think those
remaining want to change the Grex philosophy of doing business, anyway.

response 56 of 357:

Jun 21 02:43 UTC 2010

If we were to invest everything we have in a new system (which is what
it would take given some of the staff's suggestions), we'd be without
funds to operate.  

It is also prudent to keep some money as back up in the event of a
shortfall in funds or an increase in expenses, thus not all of the money
we have is available for a new system.  So we'll come up short if we
try to do that.  It has been suggested to run a fund-raiser for a new
system, which I think is fine.  But we need to to have a clear idea of
what we want to do with that new system (which is what this item is
intended for).

response 58 of 357:

Jun 21 17:17 UTC 2010

Re 57: yeah, that's on my list of ideas, too.  Other similar systems
have lower rates, so to be competitive, we might want to lower the
cost.  Then it wouldn't prove as much a barrier to those who feel
Grex has a huge pile of cash (which I would argue it doesn't unless
you feel like limping along like we are now, with few members, old
equipment, etc. in which case we have about a year or so to go).

response 60 of 357:

Jun 21 19:00 UTC 2010

re #52 see this is one of the problems.  You suggest ideas here and 
people get defensive.  Grex has thousands of dollars in the bank and 
yet was down for more than a month this past December because it took 
that long to get the board to meet and authorize a hundred bucks to 
purchase new hardware.  It also didn't help that even though there 
multiple staff members, there was only one apparently who knew the old 
code well enough to be of any use fixing it.  Poor STeve got bashed for 
taking so long fixing things when other staff members didn't want to 
touch Grex with a ten foot pole.

At least one board member (Cross) said he wanted Grex to go away.  

So don't sit here and get defensive when you've got a Grex that is a 
shell of what it once was and expect people to call those serving on 
the staff saints.  Hey I've volunteered places and I've never looked at 
the fact that I was donating my own time as an excuse to be above all 
criticism.  

response 62 of 357:

Jun 21 20:37 UTC 2010

Yep.

response 64 of 357:

Jun 21 20:44 UTC 2010

(whoosh)

response 66 of 357:

Jun 21 21:00 UTC 2010

When you are ready to serve on the board richard, people might take your
criticism more seriously. As it stands, it is doing more harm than good.

response 68 of 357:

Jun 21 21:09 UTC 2010

Think about it.  I've offered half a dozen suggestions here in this 
item asking for such, to slynne's zero suggestions and mary's zero.  
They aren't offering new ideas, they are criticizing those who dare to 
say anything.  This is another example of grex's board and staff being 
way too insulated and cliquish, which has been an ongoing problem here 
for years.  This is why its the same people serving over and over.  Why 
should any well meaning outsiders want to serve on the board when all 
you get is apathy and thin skin.

response 70 of 357:

Jun 21 21:14 UTC 2010

I was assuming there were others who could do the work.  I don't live 
in Ann Arbor and I am not a CS tech person.  One can criticize the 
performance of invidividuals while not putting oneself up as the best 
person to do the job.  Hell I criticize the President sometimes and I 
don't put myself up as the one who should step in and do the job.

response 72 of 357:

Jun 21 21:54 UTC 2010

It would be different if there were a lot of people who wanted to be on
the board. People can be critical of the POTUS because even with all of
the criticism, there still are a lot of people willing to do the job.
That isn't the case here. Instead you are beating up the only people
willing to do *any* work because they arent willing to do enough work to
satisfy you. That makes people less likely to contribute. 

I appreciate constructive posts. But being overly critical of the few
people willing to do any work is not constructive. It is especially
annoying when it comes from someone not willing to actually contribute
in any meaningful way. Not to say that your suggestions aren't
meaningful but trust me, grex has never been short of people willing to
tell everyone what should be done. grex is short of people willing to do
anything. You do not need to be in Ann Arbor to serve on the board. You
need time and a phone. 

response 74 of 357:

Jun 21 23:11 UTC 2010

I wonder if all this animosity of discussion would happen if we all were
speaking face to face?  Perhaps, but I kind of doubt it would go on for
long.

I certainly don't appreciate being called apathetic or inflexible.
It sure doesn't make me want to work harder or listen/read more
attentively.  Our goal is generally to build a consensus before acting,
which is difficult to do at this time especially with objections to any
idea.  The Board can pass policies without asking the users but we try
not to do that, so that's one reason for this item.

Things like major policy changes and strategy development often have no
obvious answer and require much discussion before the best course can
be chosen.  So, the sooner we get to respectfully and constructively
discussing what we can do, the better.  

I don't find some of the comments very constructive or very explanatory.
For example, what does a "make or break overhaul" mean here (resp 51)?
What is entailed?  How much does it cost?  Etc.  Just saying we need an
overhaul isn't constructive.  But what an overhaul means to you, with
examples, might be helpful and influence our decisions.

As to blaming people for what they didn't do last year, and 5 week
outages last year, move on.  What's done is done and we've done what we
can do to not have it happen again at least in terms of outages.  Yes
it's important to understand how we got where we are, but blame is not
constructive.  You'll catch more flies with honey than you will with
vinegar.  Let's move forward.

I do appreciate the ideas.  It would be helpful if they did not often
appear as criticisms.  Putting people on the defensive is not the best
way to get a fair evaluation of your ideas.  And just tossing an idea
out there isn't the end of it because you need to potentially add to
what you said before people understand what you mean. You may even be
asked to compromise or modify your idea!  But that's the risk you take
when you start talking.

response 76 of 357:

Jun 21 23:47 UTC 2010

re #74 thank you kent, I hear where you are coming from.