Sorry in advance about the lengthy post.

I've commented on this topic of more structure, more whatever, before and I 
was at first advocating structure within the meeting.  I have read all the 
comments and input, and I am now coming down on the side of Jared to leave 
the meetings alone, more or less.  If you want to talk about a particular 
subject, get everyone's attention, throw out a topic, and away we go.  I 
experimented with this last month.  It worked pretty well.  I did it with 
recent Linux news events.  It took a little effort to keep the conversation 
on track, but with a little practice, I believe it can be done.

Let me qualify my comments here.  I am the president of a very structured 
group, the Heart of America DB2 Users Group, http://www.hoadb2ug.org/  We 
meet once a quarter, the first Monday of the third month of the quarter.  We 
rent a hall at the BTA, and serve lunch.  This costs each member $40 a 
meeting, with discounts for a full year membership.  Usually this cost is 
paid by an attendee's company.  We bring in speakers from all over the 
country.  Usually one for either IBM's Silicon Valley Labs or the Toronto 
Labs, then another speaker who is usually a trainer, and we have them give 
training on the days following the meeting.  As you can imagine, the 
coordination and work that goes into putting on this show four times a year 
is enormous.  This structure works for a group of people, data base people, 
who work with structure every day in their jobs, and the product they work 
with.  I've been trying to loosen them up, but it's a long row to hoe.  :-)

The KCLUG, for me, has been just the opposite activity for me.  It embodies 
the free wheeling nature of Linux.  As we often joked about our meetings, you 
make of it what you want,  it's free, there's no one leading the show, but it 
just works.  It requires your participation to make it work for you, however.   
I don't really want to change this.  Like Jared pointed out, I have enough 
structure in my life.  I'm trying to get away from structure.  That's what 
appeals to me about Linux.

Be that as it may, I also feel that part of the cost of me downloading and 
using all this wonderful free software, is that I advocate, at the grass 
roots level, the use of Linux.  A very effective way to advocate is through 
training.  I proposed some time back putting together presentations about 
introductions to linux and taking the presentations to libraries around the 
city.  Advertising at and through the library system.  Getting more new 
people to find out about linux, and introduce them to software freedom.  Now, 
we could take that idea one step further and cooperatively put together 
various classes on various topics.  I would see this not as a "fork", but as 
an "extension" of what the group is, and has become.

Is there any interest in pursuing this idea as a compromise between those who 
wish to keep the meeting unstructured, and those who seek a more formal 
learning environment?

Discuss.

Peace in the world,
Jim Herrmann
President, Heart of America DB2 Users Group