[aclug-L] Re: ACLUG

["Dale W Hodge" <dwh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: discussion-bounce@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:discussion-bounce@xxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Tom Hull

I'm going to snip this down a bit. I hope everyone can follow along...

> The crack about "normative standards" was just that, but this is my
> point: if the presenter doesn't know the subject, he's not a presenter;
> at best he's a facilitator in a study group.

Hum... I hadn't thought of it in that way.

> Presentations work when the presenter knows what he's talking about,
> and everyone else is there to learn. Study groups are something else.
> Study groups may be a good thing to do, but they demand a level of
> commitment from everyone above and beyond what presentations entail.

If we limit our speakers to those who know without a doubt what they are talking
about, we aren't going to find too many people able to do the job.  So the
question becomes what level are we willing to settle for?  Maybe in the past
we've been willing to settle for too little.


> Better to adjust the format so you don't need to find another Goerzen,
> than just hang onto a format that isn't working.

But what would that format look like?

> The Star Office presentation was a combination of general overview and
> personal experience show-and-tell, which made it interesting in a very
> general way without getting tied up in details.

So maybe we should shoot for more of these?

> I don't think the issue here is the subject so much as how you go about
> presenting it. Take Samba for example: one can do a tutorial and go into
> hacking config files, or one can do an overview and cover what sort of
> things Samba can do, and talk about your experiences with it, security,
> performance, etc. You might seek out 3-4 members who've done this to get
> a range of opinion/experience, as well as spread out the workload. It's
> probably much easier to recruit someone to participate in a panel than
> to give a solo presentation (especially a good one).

Hum... A panel discussion. As a Q&A session, or as a means of presenting a
topic?  I'm sure we could enlist enough help on Q&A. Presentations are the
problem...

> >We've stayed at WSU because it was felt that a
> > large portion of our members were students at WSU. That may no longer be the
> > case. If not, then we need to think seriously about alternative meeting
> > locations.
>
> Maybe you do both: have a WSU-based student group as a SIG, and ACLUG
> as a broader community group. I'm just asking for an open mind on this.

We've also talked about having a new user group and an advanced group. But we've
always felt there wasn't enough 'help' to go around.


> > I would favor 1 topic meeting and 1 "social" meeting.
>
> I don't know what you mean by a "social" meeting. There could be
> different types of meetings/events, especially if one need not get
> involved in all of them.

By social meeting, I mean something like our "pizza parties".  Where a group of
us get together and talk over whatever.

> > The problem has been one of cost. Some of the places we've looked into cost
> > quite a bit, so there would have to be some way to raise funds to
> pay for them.
>
> I'd like to stay cheap. And >100 is just a number I invented, but you
> certainly need more room than 20.

Places like the Downtown library board room costs something like $20 and holds
about 20 people.  The larger meeting room goes for something like $50.  There's
also the problem with parking meters there -- a 2 hour limit. I don't remember
what some of the other places charged.

> > That's obvious, but have you tried finding those people?  The real
> knowledgeable
> > people don't seem to see the benefit of showing up and giving a
> presentation.
>
> And why is that? Sounds like an egg-and-chicken problem.

That it is.

> > Part of talking about regular business at the meeting is to allow other
> > viewpoints to be heard.  We try not to do too much without the
> member's input.
>
> Yeah, but most of the members aren't at the meeting, and/or aren't
> informed or prepared, plus you're cutting into presentation time.

Most presentations only run an hour anyway. We could do announcements last, but
then no one would stay to hear them. :-)

> Why not do the admin/committee work on a new mail list, supplemented
> by occasional IRC meetings?

That's an idea I hadn't heard before.

> Meetings topics are a common "regular business" issue. You take the
> approach that you're supply-limited, so anyone who wants to give a
> presentation bad enough is likely to get a shot; but another approach
> would be to make it demand-driven: find out what people want to find
> out about, then try to find someone (or a panel) to do it.

Oh, we've tried that. We went as far as to have everyone fill out an index card
with 3 things they wanted to hear about. Many of them came back blank or with
only one thing filled out.  At 2+ meetings a month it didn't take long to get
through most of them.  Those that were left were topics that no one had worked
with, or at least weren't prepared to do a presentation on it.

> Set up a FAQ, maybe using one of the FAQ-building tools and/or a
> wiki. Try to find people to "own" pieces of the FAQ. Try to train
> people to look things up in the FAQ first, then ask questions if
> they don't find what they want. Capture the questions and answers
> in the FAQ.

That's been on my want list for some time. But I have only limited influence on
what actually get set up on the website.


> The key point is that you're incrementally adding knowledge to the
> website. Tutorials should go there too. Presentations. Make it some
> sort of portal: the first place to look for Linux info in Kansas.

Presentations would be great if people would send us usable notes.  Or any
notes, for that matter.

> > No, I don't see that at all.  The whole point of the lists is to
> promote sharing
> > of ideas. People sometimes learn answers to questions they have yet
> to think of
> > by just reading the lists.
>
> Maybe different mailers handle this differently, but if I want to
> reply to a post privately (which I sometimes do), setting reply-to
> to the list means I have to retype the sender's address. Doing it
> the other way around means all I have to do is choose between my
> "Reply" and "Reply All" buttons (then delete the sender, but that's
> easier than typing the sender in).

Yeah, but I would bet that most people would just hit the reply button and we'd
never see the information on the list.

> If you don't do this, as the list grows we all get swamped with
> useless replies, and/or people don't bother to respond for fear
> of burdening the list (which you receive back, and gets logged)
> where an easy private reply would be done. Trying to force all
> replies back to the list is wasteful and/or a nuisance. Almost
> all of the mail lists that I subscribe to work that way. This
> leaves it up to the individual to decide whether any give post
> is of interest to the list, which is the way it should be.

I've seen it done both ways, and I don't have a problem with either. In many
ways I prefer it this way. Otherwise a lot of discussions would likely end up
off list.


> > How much more aggressive do you want?  We asked, begged, pleaded,
> cajoled and we
> > still have trouble getting help.
>
> There are evidently some disconnects in perception here;
> I know I can recall instances for every one of your verbs,
> yet somehow I've never felt particularly welcome -- that
> there is something in my personality as well as yours [not
> the personal you] that has yet to mesh.

It may be a perception thing. When I decided I wanted to be a member of this
group, I made it a point to attend all the meetings.  When help was requested, I
volunteered.  When the time came, I volunteered to help manage Aclug.  Sometimes
I may not feel appreciated, but I believe in Aclug. I'm willing to do what it
takes to keep it going.

> Maybe you are "a
> fairly social group," and I'm just not social enough to
> recognize that, but maybe I'm not the only one with that
> problem.

I think the longer the core group has stayed together the more social we've
become. It's that way in any group.


>I'm afraid that the "committee" has always felt
> like a clique to me.

Ouch!  I hope we're not!

--dwh

---
Dale W Hodge - dwh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Secretary & Website Maintainer - info@xxxxxxxxx
Air Capital Linux User's Group  (ACLUG)
---



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.314 / Virus Database: 175 - Release Date: 01/11/2002

-- This is the discussion@xxxxxxxxx list.  To unsubscribe,
visit http://tmp2.complete.org/cgi-bin/listargate-aclug.cgi