RE: [ga] THIS FRIDAY end the nomination's time...

["Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>]

>Incidentally, looking at
>http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-nominations/Archives/msg00005.html I see
>"11:13:42 -0800 (=PST)", which is 19:13:42 UTC/GMT and 20:13:42 CET.

Yes.  The first time was from memory.  The second I posted recently was
from my local copy of the mail.  I was an hour off.

>You cannot just automatically post on the web site whatever arrives at a
>certain E-Mail address, including potential spam messages or worse.

And you cannot just go on about your business, assuming that all of us
are aware of things you aren't telling us.

Look, people.  It's very very simple.  You should be telling us every
aspect of how something is going to work.  Anything you don't tell us
must be inferred or guessed at by us if the need arises.

This is known as "communication".  This entire organization has suffered
from a lack of communication since its inception.  You're not going to
hear the end of my complaining about it until you grasp the concept and
implement it.

You HAVE to tell us everything.  To do otherwise invites misconceptions,
misperceptions, and incorrect assumptions.

Do not blame us for making an incorrect assumption when you are the ones
who know what's actually going on, but neglected to inform us.

Is it so difficult for you to let us in on what's actually happening?
Does it pain you in some way?  Is it so much to ask that you adequately
document the procedures being implemented?

I don't think so.


>Shirking?!?
>Sometimes I wish that people could use terms comprehensible to the average
>non-native-English reader.
>(Unless the purpose is more to create an effect than to be understood)

As long as English is the default language for these fora, I will continue
to use it.  My apologies if I know words you don't.  However, you are
perfectly capable of buying a dictionary or cross-language reference.
Were this conversation in another language, I'd be forced to do so, and
I wouldn't demand that the native speaker dumb down his language so I
can follow along.  "Shirk" is not a rare English word.  True, it's not
in common use by the average US citizen.  But then, consider where that
average lies.  I will not apologize for being able to use my native 
language.


>What if the nominator sends a simple message to the GA, announcing that
>he/she has E-Mailed the nomination? Joop did it, for instance.
>Sometimes there are such simple solutions!

Yes, and were that a necessary aspect of the procedure, it should have
been documented.  I recall a similar nomiination process in the not
too distant past in which there was a general confusion and uproar
surrounding the submission of nominations to the correct list vs. 
the submission to the ga list.  Make up your mind.

>Now I understand ;>).

No, your next statement clearly indicates you don't.

>Thank you for stating in plain English that your purpose is "[to make]
>noises about bad procedure" "regardless of what is actually going on".


That is not my purpose.  One of my purposes is to try to get this
organization on some sort of solid ground regarding procedure.
Part of that purpose is to point out where things aren't working.  
It's called "criticism".  I brought up the problem, I offered a solution.
All you want to do is assume I'm just braying at you.

This goes right to the heart of the matter.  Procedures are supposedly
created in this organization via a consensus process.  However, critical
aspects of these procedures are altered and/or undocumented.  This leads
to misunderstandings, arguments, and distrust.  Sometimes they're only
documented well after the fact, leading to suspicion.

What I'm trying to hammer home is that if you'd just stop glossing over
these things, the problem would go away, or at least open the door to
the possibility of eliminating them.  You see, if you document it in
advance of its implementation and publicize that fact, you allow those
it affects to discuss, understand, and if necessary change the procedure.

Things work much, much better when people feel a part of the process, 
instead of apart from the process.

You'd do well to learn that.

-- 
Mark C. Langston
mark@bitshift.org
Systems Admin
San Jose, CA