[wplug-plan] Public View of WPLUG - Action Needed?

Fri Jan 5 09:08:12 EST 2007

In response to "Greg Simkins" <greg at simkins.net>:

> Dear WPLUG Planning List: 
> 
> I am forwarding for your information an interchange I had with another CCAC Linux instructor, Ian Robertson.  I asked Ian if he had attended a WPLUG meeting.  He responded that he had, yet had a very negative impression.  I have included below my response to try to change his mind.  (btw, I have only one student signed up at this point for my class).  Does anybody recall meeting Ian?  I probably have myself, but don't do a good job of remembering things.  

It's not that I didn't read this email or have been ignoring it -- I've been
thinking about it since I received it.

I've never met Ian that I can remember, but I suspect his opinion is fairly
representative.

My opinions follow -- not to be taken as official WPLUG policy:

Ian falls into a category of people I'd call "status-quo" -- meaning they
don't want things to change much.  F/OSS advocates tend to be the opposite,
we're almost revolutionaries.  Yes, I know that some would argue that we're
actually trying to get things back to the way they _were_, but bear with
me on this.

Status-quo people tend to be put off by "passion" -- and this is a key point
I'm going to make.  Passion is simply strong emotion -- I think you'll find
that the same people who don't come to WPLUG because we're angry people are
the same people who get uncomfortable around public displays of affection and
who think crying at sad movies is infantile.

F/OSS folks aren't just angry, they're also enthusiastic and energetic.  This
tends to annoy status-quo people as well, but being "angry" in public is
considered socially taboo, while being "happy" in public isn't so they don't
really say much.  Get a status-quo person aside and talk to them privately
and you'll generally find out that they find pep rallies and similar activities
annoying as well.  Most people I talk to who complain at how "angry" the
F/OSS movement is, are really complaining about how passionate it is -- but
they don't know how to (or don't want to) articulate what they really mean.

So, back to WPLUG -- we tend to get excited and energetic over what our cool
F/OSS can do, but we also get pissed when we are blatantly attacked.  Make
no mistake, Microsoft and a few other companies _are_ blatantly attacking us.
In the business world, this is considered OK -- they're your competition,
they're supposed to be trying to outmaneuver you.  But Linux doesn't see
FreeBSD as competition, they see each other as brothers in arms -- both
trying to achieve better software.  F/OSS would _like_ to see Microsoft as
a brother in arms, but Microsoft can _not_ do that.  No more than they
can see Apple as a good buddy, they have to recognize F/OSS as a market
threat and take action.  Unfortunately, good marketing decisions aren't
always good technical decisions.  And F/OSS people are generally pretty
technical, and get upset when crappy technology is forced on them as
"standards".  See here for a current example:
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2006/01/how-to-hire-guillaume-portes.html

Good marketing.  Lousy technology.  So we have this ugly culture-clash.

Anyway.  Despite all this, I think there is some advice I can give regarding
how to handle this sort of thing.  Again -- this is not official WPLUG
anything, it's just my own thoughts/opinions:
1) Looking at section 2 of the bylaws, we are not officially angry in any
   way.  Our purpose is not to destroy Microsoft or any Microsoft-like
   entity.  You can always point that out.
2) I think official representatives of WPLUG (board members, committee
   members, etc) should do their best to set a good example of our
   _enthusiasm_ toward F/OSS -- I think that, by and large, we are
   accomplishing that.
3) In the case of the response you got from Ian, or any similar response,
   my first response to him would be "who did what to make you feel that
   way?"  Honestly, based on his letter -- one thing happened at one
   meeting.  If pointing out that one incident does not a group make doesn't
   get through to this guy, then just give up.  People who are that easily
   confused aren't worth your time to try to sway.  There will always be
   people in any group that can make the group look bad -- that doesn't
   mean that they represent the entire group.
4) If you get a name from asking #3, there are two scenerios:
 a) It's someone who should behave better: Me, or a board member or similar.
    If that's the case, I think you would be fully within your rights to
    complain to the individual, or to the investigating committee:
    http://wplug.org/pages/bylaws#7.3
    In fact, I would _expect_ you to let me know if I did something that
    put a bad face on WPLUG, so I could try to correct the problem.  As
    human beings, we're not always aware of the full impact of our
    actions.
 b) If it's someone who isn't an elected or appointed official with WPLUG,
    you could talk to him about what a diverse group we are and how we
    respect many opinions, some of them extreme.  If he absolutely can't
    stand being around said person anymore, we'll miss him at meetings.
    Otherwise, we invite him to come back and try talking with some
    other people.
5) If (and this is all too common in my opinion) he can't remember the exact
   incident or who did what, find a way to politely point out how ridiculous
   he's being.  I mean, he just said he doesn't want to be involved with a
   group but he can't remember why?

In my (limited) experience, problems like this fall in to two categories:
1) The individual has a problem that makes him incompatible with WPLUG, or
   is insane, or a jerk, or just really stupid.
2) WPLUG is doing something wrong.

If #1 is the case, it would be a waste of time to spend WPLUG resources
trying to sort it out.  Refer the person to a trained counsellor or
someone else who can help him get through his issues, or just write him
off as someone who doesn't belong with WPLUG.

The first step is figuring out which category the problem falls under.
It would be foolish and wasteful to try to adjust WPLUG to make 1 person
happy when there are already many happy people involved.  In fact, we're
liable to hurt the group by adjusting it for one person while misadjusting
it for everyone else.

I'm not saying there isn't a problem.  All I'm saying is that we do not
yet have enough information to know if there really is a problem.  If
we want to trace this particular incident down, we first need to gather
more information.

> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Greg Simkins 
> To: Ian Robertson 
> Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 4:38 PM
> Subject: Re: CIT-220 Text
> 
> 
> Hi Ian, 
> 
> I can understand why you may have gotten that impression of anger at WPLUG - especially if you hadn't attended for awhile.  There are a number of people that are motivated by an anti-Microsoft position.  We are an electic group.  We range from rabid liberal atheists to devoted Christians.  Our common interest is in Linux and actually we tolerate our differnces fairly well, I think.  I encourage you to give us another try.  I am amazed at the level of knowledge there and peoples willingness to share that knowledge. 
> 
> .....
> 
> Greg
> 
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Ian Robertson 
>   To: Greg Simkins 
>   Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 1:30 PM
>   Subject: Re: CIT-220 Text
> 
> 
>   I've been to WPLUG... I agree, there are some very capable people there - I've learned a lot from the few meetings I have attended, but I haven't been able to get past someting that happened at one of the meetings, that I feel illustrated an underlying problem with the group... I can't think of a great way to put this, so for lack of a better description... There seems to be a lot of anger at WPLUG.
> 
>   Even though I love Linux, I don't understand or participate in the elite Linux attitude. But at WPLUG, it seems to go beyond that. Like I said above, there is some kind of deep-rooted hostility among (at least a few) of the members, some of them high-ranking too...
> 
>   That being said, I have met some really great, laid-back, interesting, hard-working, intelligent people there as well.
> 
>   Maybe I should learn to not let a few bad (apples) experiences ruin a good thing...
> 
>   ......
> 
>   I currently have a job in Health Promotion, but I'm repursuing my first love, software engineering.
> 
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----
>   From: Greg Simkins <greg at simkins.net>
>   To: Ian Robertson <robeis1822 at yahoo.com>
>   Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 6:36:46 PM
>   Subject: Re: CIT-220 Text
> 
> 
>   I've had it happen as well (class cancelled).  I have been doing this adjunct gig for about 5 years (I lose track).  This is the first time I have been assigned to CIT-220.  
> 
>   Have you ever been to the Linux Users Group (www.wplug.org)?  There are some very capable people in the group - a good place to learn about Linux.  
> 
>   If you want to join me for lunch some day, we can exchange ideas.  
> 
>   Greg
> 

-- 
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.