I'm not the referred to board member, and my term hasn't started yet, but my first attempt to remedy this is here: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=4440

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com

Again, there's the Board, and the people who do things. Sometimes, there's overlap, but not always. Kind of a "legislative vs. executive" kind of thing. Sure, there's crossover, and many of the board members do their own thing, but if there's been a problem implementing board policies, well, that falls squarely on my head. If there are board members out there who have policies that i'm supposed to be working on, PM me or give me a call -- and expect me to ask you to help


I would suggest that the rich constellation of these things ringing the game are instead, perfect examples of the market that the AGA should already have been catering to. We don't have our own servers. We don't have our own forums. That's ok, i'm not saying we should supplant them, just observing that where there was a vacuum, an ecosystem has emerged. Consider the myriad of sites to help promote your club -- igolocal, promotego, goclubsonline, just off the top of my head. Not only do they all do what the AGA should've been doing in the first place, but their success is indicative of how well the AGA wasn't doing it!

So yes, you can change the system from without or within -- and i sound like shapenaji here -- but it is always thus. I think we're all pushing the wheel in the same direction, so no skin off my nose if you find working for Kaya.gs or the AGF or whatnot more satisfying



No, we need people who can get things to 100% because the nature of things is such: people get to 80% (if that!) and fade away. If it's not done & ready to go, finding another volunteer to finish the job is really nontrivial. Like pwaldron said -- getting a group of people together and keeping them together until it gets across the finish line is *hard*, organizationally *hard*. Can't have this argument both ways.

That said, i am trying very hard to make it possible for volunteers to make incremental advancements. Github, for instance, is a real good way for people to do this. For instance, if you'd like to improve next years gocongress site -- it's on github, along with an issues list. Fork it!

(and NB that i *do not* include pwaldron in the list of people who get things to 80% and fade away -- not at all!)

As for other people taking credit for faites accompli -- that should never happen. Won't ever happen on my watch. If it is happening, SPEAK UP.

seigenblues, I like your style here! Quick question/clarification: It sounds like you're acting in some official capacity for the AGA (beyond the general everyone can be a volunteer). Are you an officer? I looked here http://usgo.org/org/who.html and didn't see your name. Now that I double checked your OP I didn't see you put your real name either, although I guess most people know it... It's not a secret right?

But isn't this rather the point? People drop out for both good and bad reasons -- life happens. But leaders are able to keep the ball rolling until the end.

This happens in every organization (volunteer or otherwise). But what makes the difference, is the leadership. Not that the leadership themselves are the ones who do the actual work (that defeats the purpose too, and makes the rest of the membership feel unneeded) -- Leadership in successful organizations are able to find and refill the gaps left behind when team members drop out and see the job finished (even with changing leadership too).

This takes planning and communication.

Expecting things to get done one person per project at a time is a mistake, in my opinion. Yes, getting teams to work together is hard. Very hard. But it keeps projects alive and maintainable for the future.

That's exactly why this forum is here. The previous forum was a one man project, and it died when he faded away. This one, on the other hand, is a group project with a charter to carry on even after the principles themselves fade away.

that's because we no longer have a webmaster

Actually, as of this thread, we do. I followed up with Yertle and now he's onboard.

As for "webmaster" -- we don't have a single person responsible for all of our web presence anymore. We actually have a team: server admin, drupal guys, people who update content, and The Guy Who Checks webmaster@usgo.org. Bear with us while we get up to speed.

xed_over -- i completely agree. In fact, that kind of ties in with my other points: my goal of making it possible for volunteers to make incremental progress. Finishing old projects. And again, on the distinction between legislative & executive. The board is very high profile -- their names are published, they run for election, they're even being held accountable here, etc. The volunteers who implement are much lower profile. Quick! Name the ratings guy!

The only place i'd disagree with you is the idea that leadership should not be the ones who do the actual work themselves. They should be able to pitch in where they can. I guess all i can say is that if there's too great of a disconnect between legislative & executive, it leads to the board's ideas being implemented in a fashion not to their liking, which in turn leads to the board being way, way too specific & verbose, which leads to liver damage.

yoyoma -- i'm superstitious about identifying myself in an online forum. But you can find me at operations@usgo.org. I also had something to do with the congress that just happened in Santa Barbara; were you there?

Heh, as someone getting his words thrown back at him I feel a bit called out and somewhat obligated to respond (=


Unfortunately this is the type of task I may be completely able to do (though John F. will probably disapprove of my methods (= ) so I guess I'm now stuck in the put up or shut up category. (Actually been wanting to try and write something up for the EJ but wasn't sure where to start...). Provided I can get my act together a few contributors to this thread might be hearing from me (in some form or another) hopefully by the end of the week (I mention this because for some it might end up being via L19 message)....

When I search Gmail, your real name comes up eight times just this year. So I'm not sure why you don't want your name on the forum, unless...

...you post from work like all the rest of us?

_________________
Occupy Babel!

Mef- Awesome! Looking forward to the stories

hyperpape - like i said, just superstition. Work is actually really awesome -- i work at a very small company. It'd be harder for me to *not* post at work. And when you search ...gmail? I'm in your gmails? @_@

E-journal emails. Unless I am wrong about who you are (the name seigenblues isn't there, mind you).

_________________
Occupy Babel!

I'd actually be very surprised if yoyoma and seigenblues hadn't met at congress...

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com

I'm Andy Olsen. Nice to finally meet you on the interwebs after knowing you from the reallifes.

BTW quick L19 forum question: In the edit profile does every field there show up in every post you make? For internet I'd like people to be able to find my real name if they click on my profile, but I don't really want it to show up on every single post I make. I guess I just share a little of seigenblues' superstition.

I appreciate the opportunity to help out. It is going to take me a few days to get acquainted with everything; I probably won't feel safe making edits until this weekend. At that point I might start a new thread of things that are embarrassing out of date that need updating now. We are migrating the site in the not too distant future so all changes for now will be maintenance related and not feature upgrades but I don't want to see the site in a rotting state before we get the shiny new one up and running.

This seems a great opportunity for the AGA to show how transparent it can be.

@Seigenblues: You have just 'hired' Yertle. ( Thank you Yertle! ) Can you tell the world what the job specs are? What you are expecting of him, and what support/tools/access you are offering him?

Cynical minds want to know.

_________________
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207

"cynical minds", indeed! therein lies the skepticism of the AGA towards the idea of transparency It's not a very forgiving audience -- something about being blamed for the sins of the fathers, yadda yadda.

I actually had a long conversation with Yertle on the phone, asking him what he could do, what he hoped to do, what he expected to do, etc. etc. Perhaps you could ask him what he made of his job description -- and ask him again in a few months. If it's not clear to him, i'm sure he'll ask me

This is kind of a non-answer, and here's why: These aren't job positions, with salary and benefits. We're volunteers, and I'm not convinced having hard & fast 'job specs' is the best way to attract & retain volunteers. His job will evolve to be a combination of what he likes to do, what he's best at, and what needs to be done ... just like mine

I'm not sure if "greater AGA transparency" equates to "produce on the spot job descriptions for anyone who asks for them ever."

All that said, I will answer the question "what support/tools/access am i offering him?"
Anything that he needs, at all, to the best of my ability.

I've heard speculation that he intends to stake claim over all he can see -- can you comment on this?

I'm more of an action versus words guy.

http://www.usgo.org/board/ApprovedMinutes/

My hero!

You raise many good points, some of them I disagree with.
But I wanted to comment on the one you raised above.

A lot of times when people start an initiative, they start it with the aim to finish it. I know, I started some myself and I have seen other started as well... most of the time the problem these people have is the apparent lack of interest of the group they are giving their time to. In case of AGA... if I start, say, a forum development for AGA, and I keep going at it week after week, without any input, without any contact, without anything from AGA itself, who just sits there waiting like a spider in its web for me to hand out the finished product AND documentation... you see, at some point I say 'screw that, I am gone!'

What I would like AGA (and other organizations) to do is this:
Commission the project... I/somebody can volunteer... but there has to be a team to work on that, even if its just testing and commenting and showing interest, I/somebody can do all the actual coding. Some input, some interest, some guidance... This way I know my project is important and valuable. And also - my input as volunteer should be treated as valuable, my words should be heard.

I don't see this happening. From what you say, AGA just sits there and says: give us a project 100% done, or its worthless... we evaluate after you're done and maybe give you some credit.

In an ideal world, we would have an active AGA forum (part of L19 or not) where projects could be explained, monitored, and input could be given and ideas exchanged. Transparently. To me, this should be the FIRST priority of the board members - bring it all into the open, and empower people rather than disillusioning them. And that's not just for AGA - I don't see why any of the associations shouldn't be doing that. To me, its common sense, and this is how I would run things if I was in charge. Call me naive... but what's right is right.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

If I can put what Bantari wrote another way. This is how I see it:

The AGA, as the governing body, acts as the sponsor. The members of the AGA are the customer, and the volunteers are the contractors. The AGA is responsible for finding out what the customer wants and conveying that information to the volunteers. This is a two way street: updates should be fed back to the AGA and feedback back to the volunteer. The AGA leads are the facilitators of this process.

If the members don't want it, the time is wasted.
If the AGA doesn't communicate with the members, the members won't want it.
If the volunteers don't do the work, nothing will happen.
If the AGA doesn't communicate with the volunteers, the work won't get done.

_________________