discuss: LDP Committee?
Subject:
Re: LDP Committee?
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
8 Mar 2005 05:17:39 -0000
Message-Id: <20050308040526.GB17357@lafn.org>
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 01:21:57PM +0000, Martin Wheeler wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Mar 2005, Guylhem Aznar wrote:
>
> >On Sunday, 6 March 2005 at 16:53:13 (+0000), Martin Wheeler wrote:
> >>Guylhem -- could you let the list know *where* exactly one can find
> >>information on _who_ is staff; _how_ they are chosen to become staff
>
> >Who is staff- big question. The best definition is "whoever is on the
> >staff mailing list". I don't keep a list, because it also depends on
> >the person will to participate to the list.
>
> Sorry, Guylhem -- that's nowhere near good enough.
>
> In fact, it's so damn' pathetic, that I hereby formally request of this
> community -- and you, as its unelected group leader
Guylhem was in fact elected leader and I voted for him. The other
contender called himself "The Poet". Actually, it's more complicated.
No one even nominated Poet so Guylhem won, after people has voted for
him. Here's from my very incomplete archives:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri Jun 4 06:43:35 1999
From: ####@####.#### (Tim - HOWTO Coordinator)
Subject: LDP Leadership
To: ####@####.####
Hello,
Just wanted to take a minute to announce the results of the LDP Leadership
nominations.
There was only one nomination and it was for:
Guylhem Aznar ####@####.####
Therefore no voting was necessary.....
Congratulations and good luck. Let's all come together and give him all
the support that he needs and make the LDP a more or less "in your face"
organization that gets everyones attention!!!!!
Best Regards,
Tim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri May 28 13:39:10 1999
From: ####@####.#### (David Lawyer)
Subject: Leader Vote
To: ####@####.####
Reply-To: ####@####.####
I was going to propose that we continue without a leader but have Guylhem
become a howto co-coodinator. Well, it's too late to propose this so I'll
vote for Guylhem as leader. A major consideration is that he has a lot of
time to devote to the LDP. While he sometimes is mistaken in what he
says, he is also quick to correct his mistake once someone points it out.
Dave Lawyer
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri May 28 12:53:00 1999
From: ####@####.#### (Alessandro Rubini)
Subject: Re: LDP Leader nominations
To: ####@####.####
> If you would like to post an anonymous vote, them email me directly at
> ####@####.####
While you collect anonymous votes maybe you should collect
non-anonymous ones as well to avoid too much fuss in the list.
Also, early public votes might influence later votes or discuourage
voting if it *looks* like there is already agreement.
To instantiate this problem, I vote for Guylhem :)
/alessandro
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -- that a list be published, illico, of those people who are currently
> members of the staff list; an explanation of how they came to be
> members of the staff list; and a description of the formal procedures
> by which any member of this voluntary community may themselves become
> a member of the 'staff' list.
We don't have formal procedures nor are we supposed to have them:
But I think it's a good question as to how people get on the staff list.
Here's from the manifesto:
We feel that working together informally and discussing projects on
our mailing lists is the best way to go. When we disagree on things,
we try to reason with each other until we reach an informed
consensus.
Note that the manifesto was written before there was a staff list.
There can't be formal procedures without by-laws and we have no by-laws.
But I doubt if having formal procedures would help much. It might even
hurt.
> Also, a full description of the duties and powers of the LDP 'group
> leader'; how one becomes 'group leader'; and what this person's
> resonsibilities are. (Because nowhere is this information publicly
> detailed; and it's becoming a festering canker which is preventing the
> group from functioning at full efficiency.)
To become a group leader it requires informed consensus. Be warned that
when Guylhem was elected, the other candidate later misused LDP for his
own financial gain so beware of who you vote for if we elect a new
leader.
> And if you're not prepared to do this, I hereby formally propose to this
> community that the so-called 'staff' list be discontinued and disbanded;
> that the position and role of group leader be put under scrutiny as to
> effectiveness and desirability; and that a now long-overdue and total
> re-organisation of the structure and modus operandi of the whole LDP be
> undertaken immediately.
Please read the open archives of the staff list.
> >Regarding how one becomes staff, if there is some special need and/or
> >someone who appears to be doing good thinks for TLDP, this person is
> >invited unless someone from the staff has a good reason to say no.
>
> That's even worse. So you are telling me that the LDP is run by a
> bunch of self-appointed cronies who decide who is to become part of
> their cabal according to whether the cut of their jib fits or not?
If decisions are to be made based primarily on the discuss list, then
this isn't so since then the discuss list is primarily running LDP. The
staff list people are not the only ones running LDP. But there are a
lot of non-profits that work the way you're describing above run. In
many cases it works well.
> No way.
>
> Sorry, Guylhem -- this has GOT to change.
> It's undemocratic; ad hoc -- and wide open to accusations of abuse.
> I've had enough. And I'm sure many others on the list feel the same way.
>
>
> >>And what their powers are? >How their responsibilities are defined?
> >Limited. We only take decisions when we think we may need to "impose"
> >something for the common good. We haven't been doing that for long.
He means for a long time I think. In thinking about what was "imposed"
I suppose the review process was one. But the author of this: Joy
Goodreau, helped us out a lot.
David Lawyer
> With what authority? Vested in you by whom? Who decides the common
> good? A bunch of self-appointed so-called 'representatives'? (It
> must be obvious that you don't represent any philosophy of mine.)
> Let me quite clear on this -- I consider myself a part of the LDP
> (even though I'm no longer actively maintaining any documents); and I
> would participate even more actively in the workings of the group if I
> felt more comfortable with the way it is organised and run. I
> obviously don't feel comfortable at all.
[snip]
