Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 21:23:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at KeithLynch.net>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Minutes; other news
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

It's clear that there has been some *serious* miscommunications and
misunderstandings.  Sam suggests that Paul, Gayle, and I just drop the
whole thing.  I disagree.  I think that to reasonable people, more
communication can only help, not hurt.  I also believe that requests
to end a thread are a bad idea; they'll either be ignored, or they
will motivate people to post quickly, while still angry, to get the
last word before Sam asks that everyone stop posting on the subject.

It's also very unfair to someone whose honor or motives have been
impugned to not be allowed to respond in the same forum.

This will necessarily be a fairly long message.  Please bear with me.

First let me make clear that Paul and Gayle are completely in charge
of the Capclave website.  And there is no longer a mirror site.  I
am completely out of the Capclave website business.  I don't seek to
change that.  I only seek to clarify what happened.  And to defend
myself against what they have recently said.

In February, Paul volunteered to come up with a new logo for the
existing Capclave website, which I had designed.  On the March
4th WSFA meeting, he presented a logo.  On the April 9th Capclave
meeting at Peggy Rae's, he presented a whole new layout, completely
revamping the website.  It soon became clear that the Capclave folks
overwhelmingly preferred his design to mine.  The question was,
where were he and I to work together on the changes?  I don't have a
graphical PC at my apartment, and I have no way to get to his house.

Peggy Rae volunteered that we could meet at her place.  I was willing,
but wasn't completely pleased with this, since it takes me about three
hours to get there, and three hours to get back.  Then in April I
started a full-time job, which really cut down on my free time.
(I had been between jobs for several years.)  So at the April 15th
meeting, I ceded all control to Paul, and said I would simply place
whatever files he provides me in the Capclave area of wsfa.org.  I
phrased this as him replacing me as Capclave webmaster.  By this I did
not intend that he do anything except what he had already done, and
agreed to keep doing.  He would do all the design; I would take care
of the hosting.  My intent in phrasing it thus was to give him all the
credit for the website.

At about the same time I resigned from the Capclave committee.  There
were three reasons for this:

* I was no longer really doing anything for Capclave, other than
  what I would hope every WSFA member would do (e.g. place fliers
  in libraries).

* The meetings were held at Peggy Rae's house, which is hard for me
  to get to.

* I suddenly had much less free time.

* Capclave discussions were held on a Yahoogroups list, and I refuse
  to have anything to do with Yahoo or Yahoogroups for reasons I
  won't get into in this message (but see, for instance
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/10/AR2005091001222.html).

This worked well for several months, with one trivial exception:  There
was a delay of three days in my placing a list of Capclave members
online, since the club had previously voted that such a list would not
be made public.  After the next meeting, a couple days later, at which
I was told the list had been be replaced with a list of people who
agreed to let their names be public, I promptly placed it online.

On July 1st, we held a Capclave website meeting at the Gillilands'.
In attendance were Mike Walsh, Mike Nelson, Sam Lubell, Colleen, Paul,
Gayle, Lee, Bob, Barry, and myself.  At that meeting, we unanimously
agreed on the present setup in which Paul and Gayle would handle both
the hosting and the content, and I would continue to host a mirror
site.  The transition was completed two weeks later, and everything
has been working smoothly.

It's rather disingenuous to claim that I dumped the job of webmaster
on Paul and Gayle, when what I did was conceded the job of website
design to them in April, at *their* request, and then later also
conceded the job of website hosting to them, in July, also, if I
recall correctly, at their request, or at least at a small meeting
at which they were both present, gave plenty of valuable input,
and made no objection.

At first Paul and Gayle told me when they updated each file, so that I
could download a copy from capclave.org for the mirror site, just as
before July I downloaded copies from amperzen.com for both the main
and mirror sites.  There was one minor complication in downloading a
php file, but that was solved by emailing it to me.  I was told that
that one file doesn't change, only the members.txt file that it
references, so this was a one-time problem, already solved.

But eventually the updates became more sporadic, then ceased.  When I
asked Paul about it, he said he hadn't made any updates for a couple
weeks, but would do a whole bunch soon.  More weeks went by, and I
noticed that changes had been made.  I suggested that it might be
easier for him just to email me a directory listing, showing when each
file was last updated, rather than remembering which files he had
updated since he last emailed me.  He replied that he didn't know how
to do such a directory listing.  After he said that, I assumed he'd
seek out someone who did know, then get back to me.  I could have
told him how myself, had I realized it was hosted on a Unix machine;
I wrongly assumed it was on an NT system, which I'm less familiar with.

When I continued to get no response for weeks, I mentioned the issue
at the September 2nd meeting.  It was my hope that someone would
volunteer to show him how to do a directory listing.  Perhaps even how
to automate it, so that I'm emailed a directory listing every night,
with zero effort on Paul's part.  Alternatively, that the club as a
whole would discuss the pros and cons of a mirror website, or schedule
a time for those interested to get together to discuss it.  But Paul
immediately cut off all discussion by saying he'd talk to me after the
meeting.  He didn't.

I didn't know that there had been a medical emergency.  What I did
know is that he hadn't talked to me after the September 2nd meeting,
either in person or via email.  I expressed my frustration with the
situation in a September 3rd email to Elspeth, in which I said that if
I didn't hear from Paul or Gayle before Third Friday I would simply
shut down the mirror site, even though it was my understanding that
the club preferred that I maintain it.  Elspeth replied to my message,
but didn't respond to that part of it.

I had been hoping for another productive Capclave website meeting
like that on July 1st.  We could have discussed the pros and cons of
a mirror site, and whether it would be worth the effort of keeping me
updated.  I didn't think this could reasonably be discussed unless
we all knew what was *meant* by a mirror website, and unless all of
us had a chance to list all the advantages, and to figure out what
information I needed to maintain it, and how I could be provided that
information with the least possible effort by others.

So I'll admit I was a little miffed when I got an email on the 12th
that implied that such a discussion had been held without me, and
had come to a conclusion based on incomplete information.

Just to be clear, by a mirror website, I *don't* mean an *automatic*
mirror, to which any main-site changes propagate automatically and
instantaneously.  Such a site would fail in what I see as one of its
main functions:  As a bulwark against data corruption or hacking on
the main site.  What I meant by a mirror site was something I would
manually update within a day or two of when I'm notified of changes on
the main site, after doing a quick sanity check on each of the files
before I put them up, to make sure there's been no accidental data
corruption (e.g. the file doesn't contain a block of nulls in the
middle, nor is it a duplicate of a completely unrelated file, nor
is it of zero length), and no hacking (e.g. it's not touting a
pornography site or something).

The value of a mirror site includes:

* Offsite backup, hundreds of miles offsite, but never more than a day
  or two out of date.

* WSFA has a copy if anything happens to Paul and Gayle.

* Outreach:  If the main site goes down, we can switch capclave.org to
  point to the mirror site within 24 hours.  And can switch the links
  on wsfa.org to point to the mirror site in a matter of *minutes*.

* Inreach:  All WSFAns should know about the mirror site, so that if
  they find the main site down, they know to look at the mirror site
  for the information they seek.

* It would maintain the tradition that a copy of all WSFA information
  is in the hands of either the secretary or the treasurer.

And there may be other values I haven't thought of, but that others
would bring up.  On the other hand, there may be disadvantages I
haven't thought of.  The only way to find out is to *discuss* it.

At the September 17th WSFA meeting I reported that I had taken down
the mirror site since I wasn't getting updates from the Capclave
webmasters.  That's all I said on the subject.  It took about five
seconds.  I waited until Paul and Gayle had had a chance to broach
the topic.  It wasn't until (acting president) Bob had moved on to
Capclave Future that I backtracked to Capclave Present and spoke
for five seconds.

I could have kept quiet, but I felt that WSFA should know this.  I
couldn't very well keep it secret even if I wanted to -- someone would
be bound to notice.  And if I hadn't said anything, who knows what
they'd think?  Some people seem to make it a habit to impute the worst
imaginable motives to others.

I could have said I had taken it down, but not said why.  Once again,
some people would make wild assumptions, perhaps that I was trying to
hurt Capclave.  Who knows?  Some would certainly ask me privately.
Would I tell them, where Paul and Gayle weren't around to respond if
they wanted to?  Or would I refuse to answer, leading to wild rumors
and perhaps distrust of my motives?

I could have said I took it down since I wasn't getting updates from
the Capclave webmasters -- and also added that they had emailed me on
the 12th to say that I should take it down because they weren't going
to give me updates.  I didn't think the latter really added anything.
Paul and Gayle were right there in the room, and could have spoken up
if they wanted to.  So could anyone else, if someone wanted to say,
for instance, that they felt that a mirror website was important, and
can't something be arranged?  As it happened, nobody did say that,
or anything else.  But I had no way to know that ahead of time.

Having said what I said, and having gotten the response that I did
(i.e. none at all), that's exactly what I reported in the minutes.
The minutes are intended to faithfully report what was said and done.
Nothing is left out unless it's trivial (in the judgment of the
secretary) (and I include far more of what's said than any previous
WSFA secretary, ever), or unless the speaker asks to keep it off the
record, or unless the club votes to keep it off the record (as they
did the names of the WFC debtors -- you won't find those in the
minutes).

Now, I do sometimes add parenthetical comments in square brackets.
No, that's not editorializing, which I believe would be highly
inappropriate as part of the minutes, but only consists of relevant
undisputed facts.  For instance, where Albacon was mentioned, I listed
the city and dates for that con.

Since Gayle seems to be upset largely about by not mentioning that
September 12th email, I have added "[Paul had informed him by email
on the 12th that they would not be providing updates, and that he
should take down the mirror site.]" to the minutes.  I hope she and
Paul find this satisfactory.  If not, I'll be glad to replace it with
any short, accurate, relevant comment that they prefer.  And, as
always, they're welcome to say whatever they like at the next WSFA
meeting, to get it on the record.  I will faithfully report it, no
matter how uncomplimentary.  Of course I, and others, may respond
to it, and if so, those responses will also be faithfully reported
in the meeting minutes.

To reiterate, I am out of the Capclave website business.  And I am out
of the Capclave mirror website business.  This is a good thing, since
I find Paul and Gayle very unpleasant to work with.  They persist in
interpreting everything I say and do in the most negative light possible.

Yes, I am still angry.  Their most recent email goes way beyond the
scope of reasoned discourse, with loaded terms like "negotiations" (as
if we were competing rather that cooperating) "snit" (referring to my
brief, accurate report), "sick and tired of letting you belittle the
Capclave site" "you should have let go" (of the mirror site, which
the club wanted me to maintain, and which they had agreed to inform me
of updates for), "you feel instantaneous response is the only adequate
response" (because I asked again after having heard nothing for
weeks), and, worse of all, "as if it were the truth" (implicitly
calling me a liar).

This, especially the last, is utterly unacceptable, and I refuse to
work with them.

I am pleased that they're doing such a good job with the Capclave
website.  But clearly they work best alone.  I wish the Capclave
committee the best of luck in working with them.