Subject:
|
Re: LUGNET members association
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:32:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4610 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
I think it does. If there was total trust, we wouldn’t require a
policy document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snip
| |
| |
Not everthing I try to say is to “push” buttons, and I’m not trying to use
something from a private email to beat him up with.
|
|
snip
| |
| |
Larry, if you took my statements above as button pushing, it was not mean as
such, I was returning the favor you did me when you rightfully questioned my
integrity.
This has been a pretty tough situation for Larry, but so far I would give
him pretty high marks for his efforts at living to a higher standard.
|
Thanks. For everything you said.
“I can think of a hundred things I’d rather do than debate this stuff.”
Ya, me too! I’ll see your 100 and raise you a hundred.
|
Larry, always the competitive one :P Levity is a good thing. and by the way,
you’re welcome.
| |
Emotions have run high here, but your recent actions convince me I was wrong
to impugne your integrity without first seeking to communicate so that we
could seek to understand the issues, and I am sorry for that. Hopefully this
has been a wakeup call for both of us (and for others in the community,
too)... we need to increase the trust among those of us that truly care, and
not let button pushers and button pushing get to us.
I’ll reiterate.
The admins want feedback and will consider it carefully. Where we’ve erred,
we will work to correct it, and we will work to put processes in place to
ensure that it doesn’t happen again (but trying to watch out for not becoming
so mired in rules and process that we have to consult a 1243 page rules
manual before we say anything!!!). But we would appreciate some patience and
understanding from everyone, some communication first before jumping to
conclusions, some assuming we mean the best and are doing the best we can,
rather than assuming that we’re powerhungry megalomaniacs.
Is this incident “over”? No. We’ve all still got some work to do, notably to
get that P&P done enough that we’re comfortable sharing it with everyone,
instead of just a circle of people chosen for their differing perspectives
and willingness to help out...
...because when it’s out there, and when it’s had a chance to be assimilated
and put in effect, we have a really NEAT technology to start using, that will
reduce the need to ask for cancels, reduce the need to send notes to people
warning them, or the need to make posts suggesting that things are off
topic, or the need to make posts asking people to consider rewording stuff,
or the need to stress out about a bit of mild profanity... reduce all those
needs by orders of magnitude.
The ToU won’t change, but we’ll have a new, (MUCH softer touch, I think)
tool, to help us out, and in cases where this tool doesn’t do the trick,
standardised letters to send out, to reduce the chance that personal feelings
will creep in.
We’re itching to get to that state as fast as we can commesurate with taking
the opinions of all into consideration and doing what’s best for LUGNET.
The above is all my opinion, it’s not official, there is still stuff to get
worked through, such as getting the committee moving along at a good clip,
getting the P&P completely finalised, and giving the community time to think
about and comment on it. At that point we’ll be where we want to be process
wise and we then hope to tackle the loose ends in the ToU. (We COULD have
done the ToU first, or tried to do them both at once, but this is the order
we chose to try to tackle them in)
To bring this back on topic (poor Rob, it’s not like HE’S ever hijacked
anyone else’s thread!), forming a members association, in my opinion, and my
opinion only, is not a thing that has to happen first before we can do those
things.
XFUT to just admin.general
|
I’m very pleased to hear this Larry, with this we can work to go forward. I look
forward to it. If the LTT and LPRV approve, I’d like unresign from the LPRV.
Now that I know I’ll be heard, I won’t have to be so vocal.
Kevin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LUGNET members association
|
| (...) I'm happy to report that you should be back on the committee as soon as the email is reconfigured (from the LTT perspective). (which should be about 2 min after Matt reads his mail) I didn't even think to ask the rest of the LPRV how they felt (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
45 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
