Re: tlug: Call for a vote

["3Web - Jonathan" <jq@example.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan B. Stone <stoneab@example.com>
To: tlug@example.com <tlug@example.com>
Date: 1998年2月23日 17:13
Subject: Re: tlug: Call for a vote


>Hi all,
>
>Maybe I'm confused, but I thought the donations were to help pay for things
>for the "group"?  If we start writing down how much each persons donates,
do
>we also start placing a price on the amount of time someone devotes or the
>amount of software someone contributes to the group?  I don't think so.  I
>have to agree with Craig that accounting for the funds is necessary, but as
>to how much each person donates.....come on.....where are we going with
>this?


This is very much in line with my own opinion.  I don't think we should go
too far into the area of what seems more like accountability than
accounting.  Specifically, two things that I think will not prove beneficial
and may prove harmful are:

1) Accounting for who donated how much, unless it should someday become
necessary for tax purposes.  It seems to me that TLUG is more about doing
and giving what we can, and there isn't really a need for keeping score;

2) Accounting for time spent on projects and recording whether projects are
a "success" or a "failure."  I'm not the first to point this out, but I'd
like to support the same position:  how are we supposed to decide what
projects are successes or failures, and how should we really say that time
is "spent" in the accounting sense, when nobody is accepting pay for
anything they do?  I could see recording TLUG funds spent on a project, but
only for the purpose of knowing what those funds were used for, rather than
for accountability.

I see the potential to generate negative feelings and consequences in
recording who donated what and in recording time spent on a project and
whether or not that project "succeeded."  Some people might feel like they
aren't donating enough and be discouraged, although they might already be
doing all they can.  Others could be disheartened by spending time on a
project that isn't judged a "success," for example.  The spirit of TLUG is
more that we all do what we can and we all get something out of it; anything
that helps all of us or some of us learn more than we knew before or returns
anything to the group or the larger Linux community must be considered a
success, IMO.

I, for one, would say that the team spirit and helpfulness in TLUG has made
me like Linux quite a bit better than I did before finding TLUG, and the
help I've found here encouraged me to stick with this
impossibly-difficult-but-somehow-likeable OS until I now have it running on
a dedicated machine all its own and am starting to actually understand a few
things and find out some of the things its good for. Groups grow and change
and have to become more organized as they do so, but it would be a shame for
us to implement any procedures that could damage group spirit and cause
newcomers to Linux and TLUG somewhere down the road to get different first
and subsequent impressions than I did.

It seems like it's already well and deservedly dead, but I'll throw my two
cents worth in on this last thing anyway: I think the idea of giving voting
weight relative to how much money a person has donated is an incredibly
horrid and undemocratic idea which has no place at all in TLUG or anywhere
else, and which I would oppose to the bitter end.  Let's leave influence
peddling in politics, where it belongs :-)

My thoughts, anyway.

Cheers,

Jonathan

---------------------------------------------------------------
Next TLUG Nomikai: 11 March Wed 1998 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 19:30
Chuo-ku, Kyobashi 1-1-6, EchiZenYa Bld. B1/B2 03-3275-3691
Next TLUG Meeting: 11 April 1998 Saturday, Tokyo Station
Featuring Tague Griffith of Netscape i18l talking on source code
---------------------------------------------------------------
a word from the sponsor:
TWICS - Japan's First Public-Access Internet System
www.twics.com  info@example.com  Tel:03-3351-5977  Fax:03-3353-6096