[wplug-plan] PR committee

[David Ostroske]

On 12/7/05, Vance Kochenderfer <vkochend at nyx.net> wrote:
> > Bill moved that we recommend the following language to the Membership
> > for approval as a special rule of order:
[...]
> Can someone provide a little background on this discussion?  At
> first glance, it seems to me like these are activities the board
> itself should be involved in.  But I might be missing the point.

The Board would definitely be involved. Beth, as Vice-Chair, is our
principle spokesperson. And I'm personally interested in doing some PR
work. I'm assuming Bill's interested in this, too, since he proposed
it.

One of the things we want to do is connect with other LUGs and other
local user groups. The Board doesn't have all those contacts, though.
Other folks, who might be interested, would, and could help us make
those connections. A PR Committee would possess leverage that the
Board alone couldn't have.

Other folks might be more inclined to promote FOSS to people who
wouldn't have otherwise considered using it. That sort of "outward
focus" would be amplified in a PR Committee that could coordinate its
actions, then answer to the Board and the Membership.

> Committees are good, but it doesn't necessarily follow that more
> committees are better.  :)

Well, yeah, we shouldn't have committees for everything under the sun.
But a bunch of people getting together to do something cool ought to
have a name, shouldn't it? :)

Maybe you're concerned about formalities. I wouldn't expect the PR
Committee chair to carry around Robert's Rules of Order, unless they
honestly needed that much structure. The bylaws committee needed it,
partly to test out how well it would work for WPLUG, and partly to
manage the sensitive nature of the language under debate. That's the
sort of stuff you don't mess around with lightly.

But the proposed PR Committee, like the Internet and Program
Committees, could afford to be more flexible. Committees can even
operate without meetings, if they can get a consensus (everyone
agreeing) on their matters at hand. If they do their job (which is
always voluntary) and provide regular reports as directed, then
everything's A-OK. I refer you to Robert's, 10th ed., pp. 480-4 for
the details.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.

> Vance Kochenderfer        |  "Get me out of these ropes and into a
> vkochend at nyx.net          |   good belt of Scotch"    -Nick Danger

--
David Ostroske <eksortso at gmail.com>