Subject:
|
Re: 2003 Spring Plans - a reply (Even Longer)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.texlug
|
Date:
|
Sun, 3 Nov 2002 23:10:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1412 times
|
| |
|
|
> > Perhaps this is my fault.
I have doubts that there should be any blame laid here.
> > Pat, Tom, you've missunderstood, I think.
I disagree. I'll try to make it more clear.
What Tom and I are concerned about is the speed at which all these wonderful
ideas were being tossed about, and more so, the speed at which they were
seemingly being portrayed as definitive plans.
Had we meant no, we would have indicated in our respective posts "We should
not go with the Boeing thing." This was not the case.
> > Nothing has been set in stone, which is why I asked for the replies to my
> > original email. If we are to talk to Boeing we need some concrete things to
> > talk to them about, such as activities and what not. We don't necessarily
> > have to have details of our activities, but we need to be able to say to
> > Boeing "we'll be holding a building competition for the public," or
> > something like that. Actual dates have not been decided, nor would they be
> > decided until we knew Boeing's schedule. In any case we need to get back to
> > Boeing with some sort of request and soon.
What Tom and I are emphasizing is reason, caution, and above all, slowing
down a tad. To wit: If Boeing absolutely MUST have an answer in say, the
next week or so, what plans have we formed concrete enough that will support
a "Yes" answer? That is the issue in a nutshell.
I submit again: That if you say to Boeing, "TEXLUG would like to hold this
event with these things going on and we'd like to make it public and we want
to have it on this date", then we are committed; what we have revealed is
what is set in stone. Can we change it later? Of course. However, too much
deviation in a scheduled event is a negative reflection on any organization.
> > Speaking of which, I don't know about those other schools, but the NASA
> > area's school district, C.C.I.S.D. has their spring break scheduled for the
> > 10th through the 14th of March.
Well, as Tom pointed out, which premise do we gamble on?
- The premise that spring break will be coming to a close, and mom and
dad will be looking for a diversion to get junior out of the house, making
it an ideal time to hold the event, or
- The premise that since it is STILL spring break, a lot of folks will be
out of town, making it a bad time to hold the event and therefore it should
be the weekend after (or before)?
Let's start from that, make a decision on that, and I'll be more
contributive and constructive with my comments.
> > As for our theme, Pat, had I known you would have taken any deviation in
> > theme so hard I would have lobbied for a different proposal to Boeing.
> > However, you must realize that what you do, and what the moonbase project is,
> > is considered to be Fantasy Space. And as unfortunate as it is, there are
> > few redeeming features of Fantasy Space when it comes to finding a sponsor.
Some misconceptions; I will try to address them.
- The proposal to Boeing does not revolve around me, to say the least.
- Actually, what I realize is that I have never heard or seen Classic Space
referred to as "Fantasy Space" before. Nor do I believe I will by any other
AFOL involved with it. However, your point that it does not lend itself to
any educational or other community-oriented benefit is well-taken.
- Since when did TEXLUG's survival depend on a "sponsor"? Our survival
depends on staying together, sharing and showing ideas, and the camaraderie
thereof; Again, Tom made this point in his last post (I pray it wasn't his
FINAL post).
Actually, I'll tell you when TEXLUG 'needed' a sponsor: When we got comfy at
NI and thought to ourselves "We could get used to this". But that was due to
Laura's hard work and NI's generosity, not by any 'need' on TEXLUG's part.
Admittingly, the selling 'hook' necessary to get us that weekend was
educational: A chance for NI to show off RoboLab.
> > However, robotics, at least here in Houston, is very much so related to
> > Factual Space, which can then be related to education. And education is a
> > heck of a lot easier to sell to any organization looking for community
> > involvment, such as Boeing. The Robotics part of the theme was added in so
> > that I would have a much easier time selling the idea to Boeing, as well as
> > a robotics firm which my father has a personal relationship with the CEO.
See last bullet above for comments.
> > In any case, as far as I am concerned, our theme is still 'Space' along with
> > Robotics. If you think it is unfair to deviate, well, take a look at me. I
> > deal with Medieval Fantasy. What on earth does that have to do with space?
> > The only thing I could possibly contribute to the theme is to build space
> > things for the sake of the meeting. Otherwise all I can do is display what
> > I've displayed before, which is totally off theme.
Ah. I never stated that it was unfair to deviate; only that I was concerned
that Classic Space, which despite your assertion has more to do with the
space industry than you assert, AND was the central idea proposed at the
last meeting, was being pushed into the background. If I may be so bold,
Classic Space should be granted some form of limelight for this meeting; at
least as one ideal for where humankind wants to be in the future. When we do
a Castle-Themed meeting (next fall, probably), I will not care one iota if
Classic Space sits on the bloody shelf collecting dust. You didn't see me
show up to NI with anything space-related. We did trains, so I brought train
stuff.
> > As for the competition, feel free to actually submit an idea for the
> > competition, because that's all I did when I suggested the 'pinewood dirby'
> > style competition. Before you replied, several people liked the idea, giving
> > T.J. the notion that so far, those who had replied approved. I didn't think
> > could do a robotic competition due to the lack of RCX bricks and the cost to
> > buy them. I was looking for a cheap, easy competition that we could feasibly
> > hold. If you have any ideas that would better fit a 'space' theme, by all
> > means say them. Yes, I have no money, but I'm willing to go out on a limb,
> > take out a loan, and help this organization which I happen to enjoy being
> > part of.
I never stated I didn't like the idea, just that Tom and I don't want to
look like cheapskate Scrooges next spring just because a few chirpers in the
winter climbed aboard the bandwagon on an idea that involved me contributing
cash I simply do not have. Call me a party-pooper if you will, but I don't
take out loans to pay for LEGO so I can improve my commitment to community
service; I'm already in hock up to my eyeballs, and I am still unemployed.
Just $5.00 is a lot to me right now, OK? At this precise moment I have 47
cents on me and only a little bit more in the bank.
Personally, I don't have to vocally or verbally express my support of TEXLUG
in order to show it. Nor do I need to make an appointment with a loan
officer. I would have thought that my commentary was a sign that I wish to
be involved.
Please do not confuse my lack of ideas (at this early date, anyway) with a
lack of commitment on my part. We still have at least 140 days (20 weeks) to go.
> > My father thought of other competitive ideas after reading the 'posts of the
> > nay-sayers.' He suggested on top of the "come, build, compete" competition,
> > aka the pinewood dirby style competition, that we could also have a "come and
> > judge our works" competition as well as a "bring your own space themed MOCs"
> > competition. The come and judge our works competition would be a publicly
> > judged thing that could last the entire way through till the end of the
> > meeting on sunday. The Bring your own competition could be either judged by
> > us, or by the public, which all the entries would need to be brought by a
> > cut off time so that there could be enough time for judgement.
Now those sound like very good ideas. I'll even throw in another one: Have
the kids build their own Space MOCs that TEXLUG members judge...I'll even
try to come up with prizes for 1st, 2nd and 3rd: TOYS R US gift certificates.
However, 'nay-sayers' is a tired, political phrase. Leave it alone, please.
Opposing viewpoints are not grounds for being tagged with that monicker.
"Hmmm, these folks seem to disagree with my sound ideas. Damned nay-sayers!"
Same as conservatives tagging anyone that doesn't conform to the party
platform as "liberals". Don't think so. In my opinion, I don't need a
counter-suggestion in order to oppose one with gaping flaws in it.
> > And then there is the biggest concern of all, the lack of people. Let's face
> > it. We have over 50 (didn't count, fair guess) emails of known AFOLs that
> > live in Texas. To date we've had maybe 20 total different people of those
> > 50 post or show up to one of our meetings. That leaves 30 people who either
> > don't care or are so busy they can't email, post or attend meetings.
Laxity, that is, not getting involved, is the real danger to TEXLUG, not
dissenting viewpoints or opinions. Often, it takes more fortitude to offer
an differing opinion than just standing idly by and nodding a head in rhythm
to everyone else.
> > Pat, you complained that there is a small circle of people decided what
> > TEXLUG is doing. Well guess what, that IS what TEXLUG is, a small circle of
> > people. We don't have a huge number of people to make decisions.
You certainly overstate your case, and at the same time incorrectly assume I
am blissfully unware of TEXLUG's statistics.
You're confusing the actions of 11 with the voices of 3 (the average number
of folks who attend the meetings vs the number who seem to make policy). I
state again: A 21 hour and 18 minute flurry of emails beginning with a "Hi
Everyone" and ending with "I appreciate everyone who replied" is rushing it.
Period. Not even a day lapsed. Has there been anything since from the
policy-makers other than your post? Nope. That is why it looked to Tom and I
as if what needs to be said, has been said. In short, we felt left out.
Well...I did anyway.
There are one- to two-day stretches that I do not check email or even log
onto the internet for various reasons. But I do check. I would have been far
less zealous in my responses if there had been one poster that said, "Yeah
but what do Tom, Pat, and all the others who have attended meetings in the
past think about this? Why don't we wait a week or so to give them a chance
to reply and submit suggestions of their own?" I'm sorry, but it takes me
longer than a day to chew on proposals and think of ideas to contribute. And
before you say it, remember I don't live in Houston.
> > Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't part of the reason of holding our
> > meetings publicly to bolster our numbers? To conscript those AFOLs who don't
> > know about LUGNET? Because of my website, I get instant messaged weekly by
> > AFOLs and youth's alike who never heard of LUGNET and are very surprised they
> > aren't alone.
Sure. Absolutely, that is one of the reasons for holding the meetings.
However, I don't happen to have a website or instant messaging. Do you ever
tell any of these folks to post on LUGNET/News/Organizations/USA/TEXLUG or
about upcoming meetings? Weekly, you say. Sounds like a lot of folks missing
out.
> > But then again, like Tom said, we could just say no to Boeing. We could hold
> > our meeting and set up our large displays at someones house... again. I
> > seriously doubt anyone has as much open room as Jason was able to give us,
> > and think of what Jason's wife would say if we not only wanted to stay at
> > his house for a whole weekend of LEGO, but were inviting the public too.
> > And then there's the idea of some free space, perhaps a church room or
> > whatnot. Ok. I doubt a church, as charitable as they might be, would allow
> > us to have our meeting on sunday, it would be too hard to work around mass
> > times. So that would leave community halls and meeting places. These
> > places would certainly not have the kind of security that NI had. Most
> > community halls are fobidden to be locked so that there is access to the
> > entire community. And I also doubt that we would have anywhere close to the
> > numbers of tables and chairs that we had at NI at someone's home, at a
> > church, or at a community hall. And then there is the idea of paying for a
> > room to hold our meeting in. Well, ok, so everyone who shows up, small or
> > large numbers, must split the cost for a two day, over the weekend (premium
> > times for events) room.
Misconceptions (part II):
- No one suggested putting out Jason's wife for a weekend. Get a clue.
- No one suggested asking a church to host us, Sunday Mass or not.
- No one suggested paying for anything except the folks that propose we buy
a bunch of racing cars and building tubs. Oh, I forgot, that's different.
Tom and I simply don't want what should be fun to turn, as it slowly is,
into something that eerily resembles work and is going to put pressure on
all of us. Only I had an issue with cost and I have made my reasons quite clear.
For cost effectiveness alone, Boeing is probably the logical course. Yes,
you're absolutely right I had to throw this in before someone came back and
threw it patronizingly in my face as if I never even heard of the proposal
or read any of the posts.
> > As far as I can tell, if we want what we had at NI, we MUST go with corporate
> > sponsorship, or otherwise known as begging for help.
> >
> > Benefites of corporate sponsorship:
> >
> > -Large rooms.
> > -Possible mass quantities of tables and chairs.
> > -Lockable rooms.
> > -Possible security guards watching over the rooms.
> > -The ability to leave our creations in the room and not having to set up
> > twice or be limited to one day.
> > -Possible financial backing for contests.
> > -Room for the public.
> > -Possible financial backing for advertisements.
These sound like terrific benefits. BTW, this is the first mention I've seen
about Boeing financing the contests, which was one of my issues. Previously,
it was clearly suggested that we (as in individual TEXLUG members) dig deep
and I simply was not given adequate time to respond.
> > If the majority decide that we don't want corporate sponsorship, hey, that's
> > fine. I'll leave finding a place to hold the meeting up to someone else. My
> > house has far too much immovable stuff in it to hold a good meeting, and I
> > know of no free place where I would trust my LEGO over night.
Again, there doesn't seem to be a majority opinion against this proposal in
existence, just issues.
> > If the majority decide that this is all a good idea, and these are
> > unnacceptable things to you, well, ok. You don't have to show up. In fact,
> > if this sort of thing is going to prevent you from having a good time, I'd
> > rather you didn't show up. I'd rather everyone who shows up to our meetings
> > have a great time.
Now this emotional bit was clearly made in anger and was obviously intended
to be hurtful. All it did was result in the very real possibility that
TEXLUG may have just lost a good man. May I suggest you lose the standpoint
of "Us vs Them" and quickly, because its starting to affect your ability to
be the fair and open person I know you to be. Come Hell or high water, I'll
be wherever the meeting takes place, I'll tell you that for nothing.
> > I want a repeat of NI. It was such a great event, and it could have been so
> > much more with more advertisement and more TEXLUG member participation. I
> > don't know about anyone else, but I thought it was an almost magical thing to
> > see all those kids seeing all of our work. One father asked me to explain
> > how I made my griffon's joints so that his kids would know that building
> > with LEGO was not necessarily a linear thing. We have so much to give the
> > world, why bottle it up?
Last time: No one is suggesting we bottle it up, not even Tom with his
preference for smaller meetings. If I may speak in his place, he is saying
that we may be in danger of taking on a political face and that is not the
kind of group he (and certainly myself) want TEXLUG to become.
NI was wonderful, but NOT typical; they were very generous with their
facilities considering that almost-total strangers wanted to utilize them,
and all they wanted in return is to demo RoboLab to us. More than fair.
And if Boeing is as generous with their facilities, outstanding! But the
trade-off is slightly higher this time: Something educational involving the
public. Result: Good for us, Good for Boeing, More Pressure on Both. Let us
consider that future endeavors with other corporate sponsors may result in
even higher price-tags, and I'm not talking about money.
> > And that's my two cents.
> > --Anthony
SUMMARY: Tom and I are not, repeat, NOT, against going with the Boeing
proposal. We felt that the relatively small response time to come up with
our own suggestions was completely inadequate and the suggestions already
proposed were coming too quickly to either respond to individually or to
really take seriously. This lead to the illusion that 2 or 3 folks are
calling all the shots. We know now that this is not the case.
And my own personal issues -- that SPACE is the name of the game here, not
electronics engineering; that I, as a member of TEXLUG, not be pushed into
finance of ANY event until I put in my views -- are mine and mine alone.
I hope to Heaven that Tom is not gone for good because NOTHING in any of his
posts warrants the response to them.
THE GOOD: Sounds like you've got a solid proposal in place. Go ahead and
start planning for it...as I have. Skip my ramblings about right and wrong
(they're personal opinions at any rate) if you wish and address my
suggestions, what few there are. And remember we are all part of the same
(albeit small) team.
MY CONTEST SUGGESTION: Have the kids build their own Space MOCs that TEXLUG
members judge...with prizes for 1st, 2nd and 3rd: TOYS R US gift
certificates, that I will try to obtain, even if it means using one of my
high-interest credit cards.
My Dollar's Worth
- Pat
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 2003 Spring Plans - a reply
|
| (...) <SNIP> Perhaps this is my fault. Pat, Tom, you've missunderstood, I think. Nothing has been set in stone, which is why I asked for the replies to my original email. If we are to talk to Boeing we need some concrete things to talk to them (...) (22 years ago, 2-Nov-02, to lugnet.org.us.texlug)
|
17 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
