Mike, I think we, like many here, just got bored with this discussion, so we ignored the eventuality of your proposed changes. Some may have ignored them intentionally, while others, like myself, just did it inadvertently, sheep-like, falling in line to what appeared to be The-Inevitable-Vote which others had also put some time into formulating. Organized or not, structured, planned for and pruned... or not, the votes are telling. As a group, we don't appear to want to make a formal change of our name. Is this not good enough for us move on? Rob On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Mike Miller <mbmiller at taxa.epi.umn.edu> wrote: > On Thu, 9 Oct 2008, Dan Rue wrote: > >> I felt that we were entering into (or continuing) a classic bikeshed[1] >> argument > > That makes no sense. We were in the process of deciding how a vote could > be undertaken. I wrote that I would send out a message detailing what the > proposed changes would be that we would then vote on. You preempted that > and other work. It was not helpful. > > This "vote" has been a complete mess, partly, you say, because of you. > > >> By my count, the "No Change" crowd is winning by a substantial margin to >> the rest of the groups combined, so most of this discussion is moot >> unless enough people change their vote, or enough additional votes come >> in to create some sort of argument for change. > > What will they win? We obviously need to start another group to replace > this one. This is not really a group at all. It's just an email > distribution list. A group has some kind of organizational structure. > > >> I'm not sure why "just voting" is being met so hostily, except perhaps >> that the results are less than favorable to some people? > > The "vote" was a disruption of a productive process. > > Mike > > _______________________________________________ > TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list >