On Oct 9, 2008, at 3:22 PM, Mike Miller 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. Mike, You're the only one who seems so upset about the voting process. You're the only one making noise about it, and the only one whose feathers seem ruffled. It would appear that more people are OK with using the mailing list than are not OK with it. > >> 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. While you may start a new group, I hardly thing TCLUG as it stands will be replaced. >> 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. Productive by whose standards? When did ownership of TCLUG fall to you? Please stop trying to be the voice of the group. I think the group can speak for itself. --- Eric Crist