Subject:
|
Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 23 Apr 2003 17:16:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1387 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Kevin L. Clague writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Tim Courtney writes:
> > In lugnet.cad.dev, Kyle McDonald writes:
> >
> > > Unless I mis-read something, I think this initial group of 5 is
> > > the (parent organization) LDraw.org's leadership doing double duty
> > > as the initial Ldraw.org Stnadards Comitee for the sole purpose of
> > > setting up how the Standards commitee will be chosen. From what I
> > > read the real Standards commitee will be chosen sometime in July
> > > (pretty aggressive schedule if you ask me.) and its very possible
> > > that it may be made up of entirely different people I suppose.
> >
> > You're mostly right. I suppose the proposal/message wasn't clear enough (and
> > this is the part I was afraid of it not being clear enough in, so I tried to
> > disclaim it).
>
> I don't think that what Kyle is describing is what I have in mind.
Me either.
Snipped the next bit because it's a good summation of the roles...
> I'm one of the instigators in the creation of the LSC,
And thanks muchly for that! progress on overall org goals had stagnated. a
good sharp poke was a good thing.
<more snippage>
> > You're right on track. I want to emphasize that - as a community site, we
> > need to start somewhere. There needs to be efforts made to end the chaos and
> > ambiguity surrounding LDraw.org standards and organization leadership. The
> > LSC proposal is intended to do 2 things: solve the issues of forming
> > standards, and introduce a need to further define what LDraw.org is and how
> > it is led.
>
> Ohhh.... I don't agree that your second part is the LSC's job. I think that
> the initiation of the creation of the LSC has brought to light the ambigious
> nature of *what LDraw.org is*, but it is not LSC's job to resolve that. That
> is LDraw.org's job with the help of the community at large.
What I think Tim meant here (and what I KNOW I mean here) is this:
Setting up the voting mechanism to elect the LSC will help resolve the
current ambiguity as a second order effect. It is NOT the LSC's job to bring
structure to ldraw.org. But bringing the LSC into existance with the
election mechanism that's being proposed will nevertheless drive structure
into ldraw.org.
Once that election mechanism is in place (meaning, once the ldraw.org
membership has self selected itself and binsorted itself into qualified to
vote (to ratify) on LSC proposals, and just general interest guys, and the
voting mechanism itself is established) it's natural to move beyond where we
are now. The current structure can be replaced with a more formal structure,
the current steering committee can be replaced with an elected one and lots
of other good things.
None of that is the LSC's job. It's the 4+1's job and the community's job.
The LSC is just the push to make it happen, at last, after much talk-talk.
Let's do the things that will enable the 4+1 to be replaced them with an
elected steering committee. But bootstrapping an org takes work. The LSC is
a good reason to finally do that work.
(I see Tim posted a response to your post as well, saying the same thing in
different words... that's good)
Hope that helps.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
| (...) I don't think that what Kyle is describing is what I have in mind. LDraw.org is the natural group to designate that their will be an LSC committee. The committee is made up of "technically qualified" members. Only members of LDraw.org that are (...) (22 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
