Organization Poll on the KCLUG Forums

[John]

You have some good points on keeping things on topic.  There are more many more Linux users and enthusiasts in the local community.  Many of the more business centered users I have talked with don't bother looking to going to the KCLUG meetings or reading the list anymore after seeing this type of thing go on.  If it is more than just a hobby or something you say you associate with, you want meaningful information, topics, discussions, and presentations from time to time.  Sharing of configurations, lessons learned, the real info about Linux, not a biased opinions to simply leave M$ and jump on board with the LUG.  There isn't a need to stay on topic all the time.  Everyone has questions, topics, and information they share that may be well off topic.  But some structure would have a positive impact in people learning new things.  

There is a lot of expertise from the programming, admin, or simple user side that could be put to good use in sharing that information.  There is much more to Linux than what you run your web server with, or which window manager and desktop environment you use.  There are in depth topics that are completely skipped over that could provide benefit to users, admins, and Linux enthusiasts alike.  A good example of this would be in the topic of filesystem tuning.  How many people specify the tunable kernel parameters to tweak performance for their applications (elevator=cfg|deadline|noop|as) depending on what they do.  This isn't just for folks trying to create high performance 10 TB encrypted storage arrays, but look at applications line Myth TV for AV files.  How about if you use samba or NFS to share those in your house?  There are plenty of things to talk about within Linux and people that know those topics well.

The point is, a little structure good.  You can call them leaders, group motivators, those that get others to contribute and make the arrangements for things, or whatever you want to call those that bring a little content to the table.  It would be nice to have set presentations at given meetings.  Most of the install fests I saw when I was trying to make it more often ended up in showing random videos, passing out the occasional distro CD or chats about the old times.  It would be nice to see something like a demonstration for installing a distro, or configuring a new system.  Maybe put it up on the projector and get others to participate.  There are a lot of good folks around with the group that can do presentations, demos, or whatever and help with that sort of stuff.  Why not take advantage of what others can do and share the knowledge in a more productive manner?


-John Frakes

PS: And yes, I wouldn't mind volunteering to help out and arrange a presentation once this is all sorted out like we did with the Virtualization presentation.  That would also be a good topic to maybe go over again since there have been a few interesting (see KVM) changes in the virtualization scene.


-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeffrey Watts <jeffrey.w.watts at gmail.com>
>Sent: Mar 19, 2008 2:01 PM
>To: Julie <betelgeuse67stang at yahoo.com>
>Cc: kclug at kclug.org
>Subject: Re: Organization Poll on the KCLUG Forums
>
>NOTE: I'm not taking sides in this debate.  I'm just a hitchhiker
>here.  Also note that I'm not replying directly to Julie.  She just
>brought up some good points.  :)
>
>Moderate:  To keep within reasonable or proper limits; not extreme,
>excessive, or intense
>
>Censor:  To examine books, films, or other material and to remove or
>suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise
>objectionable.
>
>Those are two different things.  ALL social environs are moderated.
>ALL.  Sometimes this moderation is official and in the hands of an
>individual or two and sometimes it's just enforced via peer pressure.
>Censorship can be considered an extreme of moderation.  I don't think
>anyone is talking about censorship.  What folks are asking for is for
>people to exercise good judgment and manners, and if they don't, that
>there be some process for correcting them.
>
>Talking about Hitler being a member of the Catholic church on a Linux
>user group mailing list is poor manners.  There are places for that
>kind of discussion.  Those of you who don't understand why that kind
>of discussion can offend people obviously don't go outside very much.
>I don't think people joined KCLUG to discuss such things, and when
>they get upset by it, they are in the right and their views should be
>respected.  Dismissing them as wanting to "censor" is a straw man.
>This isn't an issue of censorship.
>
>Sure, there's "free speech".  Sure, you can say whatever you want.
>But saying whatever you want whenever you want regardless of what
>others think makes you rude and a bore.  There are forums and mailing
>lists where people can say offensive things to each other all day
>long.  Viva la Internet!
>
>Anyhow, seems like what folks are asking for is for there to be some
>kind of standards for your general discussion list, and some way of
>enforcing them.  That is not unreasonable, and is how 99% of the world
>works.  That's why we have neighborhood watches, police departments,
>and government.  Those are good things, as long as they're not
>overbearing.
>
>Nobody is asking for a dictatorship.  Nobody seems to be asking for a
>sanitized, always on-topic list.  What folks are asking for is
>_moderation_.  That is, control of the extremes.  After all, I'm
>willing to bet that almost everyone would vocally support moderation
>should someone start posting racist comments...  Is that censorship?
>No.  That's _moderation_.  There are White Power websites and forums
>all over the place where that kind of "free speech" is welcome.
>
>Anyhow, do what you guys want, as I said, I'm a hitchhiker.  Creating
>a separate list for folks to say random and possibly unsavory things
>could be a good compromise, but I must ask you all this: why in a
>Linux User Group?  Shouldn't there be some attempt to keep relatively
>on-topic in a very specialized social organization like a LUG?
>
>Good luck.
>Jeffrey.
>
>P.S.  Julie makes a good point about taking responsibility for one's
>actions, but the problem here is that sometimes people don't, and they
>need to be moderated by others.  Much as in real life.
>
>On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Julie <betelgeuse67stang at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Monty J. Harder wrote:
>>
>> Just because of ONE instance of a heated discussion someone now wants to
>> effect Censorship. Is Censorship what the group as a _whole_ REALLY wants???
>> What I have silently watched up until now is a small minority trying to
>> effect its will upon the majority here in the 'new letter', the "Poll" set
>> aside. What is wrong with this picture? ...AND does it remind you,
>> personally, of another Greater Entity in this Country?
>>
>[... snip ...]
>>
>> Suggestion: Why don't ya'll just drop it like adults instead of squabbling
>> like grade schoolers or 'rumbling' like street gangs simply carry on
>> learning from this/these "debates" that one should live to be responsible
>> for ones own actions, etc instead of having impositions/restrictions
>> legislated upon everone???
>
>
>-- 
>
>"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy
>from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a
>precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine
>_______________________________________________
>Kclug mailing list
>Kclug at kclug.org
>http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug