Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 22:49:29 -0500
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>,
        WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>
From: "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: New list (was Re: This list is... )
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>

At 2/12/2006 07:05 PM, Samuel Lubell wrote:

>One should never say anything online that one wouldn't in public,
>since everything done online could easily become public.

Very true.

> > >Also, WSFA does need a list, and a YahooGroup is unsatisfactory
>
>Yes, but we're a sf group.  We should be using a mailing list run by
>a company named for a rather repusulsive species in a science
>fiction/fantasy novel.

I've never thought of Gulliver's Travels as a SF/F novel.  More like
socio-political commentary.  However, given the fantastic things used to
make the points, I guess it does qualify as fantasy.

>  Points to whomever can be the swiftest to name the novel without using
> google.

No need to Google here.  I could have handled "Struldbrug" too.

> >"WSFA" didn't choose to make Yahoo the list server.  The publications
> >officer did, with approval by those present at a particular First Friday
> >meeting...all perfectly legal, but done without the knowledge or approval
> >of those who no longer attend First Friday meetings due to the venue and
> >related events.
>
>WSFA voted on it at a meeting.  That makes it a WSFA decision.  And
>as I recall, it was discussed at a Maryland meeting before the vote.

It was discussed at a Maryland meeting *after* the vote.  I don't recall it
being discussed beforehand, but I may have missed a meeting and not
remember, but since the vote was taken in a venue not open to all members,
I'm not sure it can be called valid under the bylaws.  Some research into
this is probably in order.  last time I read the bylaws, in the fall, I was
looking for something else and only read that part in passing.

The idea to set up another list server was discussed in Virginia before the
vote, and a committee consisting of the pubs officer, Steve and Barry were
to research options for a month and report back.  That report apparently
happened in Virginia, and a vote was apparently taken there to go with
Yahoo.  There apparently was only one choice from what I've heard.

I say "apparently" a lot, as I wasn't at the meeting in VA, and am getting
this stuff either second hand, or by deduction.  At the Maryland meeting
following the setting up of the Yahoo list there were objections to this
(from me for instance), and I was told it was all done legally, so those
who were left out of participation in the list due to it could just lump
it.  Ernest approached me at that meeting and asked me to write an article
for the Journal about list serves and what options we had.  Half of it will
be in the next (current?) Journal, and the other half will hopefully be in
the next issue, depending on timing.  Yahoo has some good points (like cost
and uptime) and some bad ones (like lack of control, lack of privacy, no
way to ensure that lowest-common-denominator users could participate,
etc.).  Keith's list was (and is) better in pretty much all areas, and,
relative to Yahoo, had no real downside.  That Keith isn't a member of WSFA
shouldn't matter, as Yahoo isn't either, so we've gained nothing there.

> >Continuing to hold meetings at the Gillilands, despite the situation, and
> >to conduct important business there, no matter how legal under the bylaws,
> >is resulting in a split in the club, that is getting deeper as time goes on
> >and nothing is done to mend it.  Some people are essentially
> >disenfranchised by this situation.
>
>I'm open to suggestions of a practical alternative.  Mike, do you
>know of a place in Virginia that:
>1. Would allow us to meet from 9-12 pm on a Friday every month.
>2. That would have space for 25 - 40 people
>3. That would have sufficient parking
>4. Would not charge or require everyone to buy something.

I don't live in Virginia, so I'm not as familiar with it as people who
do.  If there are no other viable options, then WSFA is in trouble, as
there's no guarantee that Alexis and Lee will live forever, or even stay
where they have been living forever.  Eventually they will move, die, or
just get sick of us, and WSFA will have no choice to stay, whether in
violation of the bylaws or not.

You asked for suggestions to be submitted to you for alternatives.  Did you
get any?

I do know that Maryland Mensa has an event every month on a Thursday
evening from 7pm to about 11pm in a Pizza Hut's party room in
Frederick.  There's room there for 30 or so people, and everyone doesn't
have to buy something...enough want dinner that Pizza Hut gets enough
business from the group to make them happy, and if a few folks don't join
in, nobody cares.

I do know that the Montgomery County Harley Owners Group meets once a month
in a large room (meetings are usually 60-100 people) at the ARC building in
Rockville.  They pay rent through a donation to the cause (training
handicapped folks) of a bit less than $42/meeting.

In the past the Atari User's Group met in public library meeting rooms for
an hour or two, ending about 9pm...then those that wanted to socialize
adjourned to a local eatery or pub.

Maryland Mensa's monthly meeting is in a Church rented for the evening
(about $4/person covers it).  When I was with Fidonet (pre-internet), the
local sysops meeting was held at the offices of a member, with permission
of his boss, on a Saturday afternoon.

I attend a weekly games event run jointly by Metro-Washington-Mensa and the
Games Club of Maryland at the Potomac Community Center.  The meeting room
cost there is about $15/night, and our sessions are from 7pm to
10pm.  Rooms are 3-4 times as large as either of the current venues, or larger.

Years ago I played Naval wargames with a group in Virginia
Beach/Norfolk.  they'd rent an elementary school cafeteria on a weekend to
play in (Fletcher-Pratt rules take a lot of room).  Since the group was a
501(c3) educational organization, the school was willing to rent to us for
the cost of the school employee's presense.  The Aikido dojo I went to in
Virginia did the same thing with a local school to hold a seminar one
weekend in their gym.

I'm sure something similar to one of these, or something else, could be
found in Virginia with some looking.

Do we have to meet from 9-12 on a Friday every month?  Do we have to do the
business meeting and the socializing at the same location?  Some
flexibility may open up other options, such as the above.

I'm going to double check the bylaws once I get the article done for the
Journal, but it may be that a move is not optional, and can't be ignored,
legally, by you, the other officers or the trustees.  I think I remember
the bylaws stating that all members were welcome at all business meetings,
and if the Gillilands have stated that any are not, then their place is not
an option for a business meeting, by their choice.  WSFA then would have no
other choice but to make other arrangements...which could involve amending
the bylaws of course to remove the problem.  That would, however, create
other problems.

> >I've heard mutterings of a power grab by a small group within the club,
>
>There's been no power grab.  There's no power to grab.  Continuing to
>meet in the same place that we've met for nearly 30 years isn't a
>grab of anything.

I agree about the lack of power to grab, but that doesn't prevent feelings
that someone, or some group, is trying to run things their own
way.  Feelings don't have to be logical.  They're pesky that way.

The mutterings aren't just about the location issue.  The Yahoo group thing
(which appears to have been Ernest's decision alone...again legal, since
he's pubs officer, but problematic as part of a pattern), the way Ernest
was made pubs officer...which had obviously been worked out ahead of time
(I *was* at that meeting), which may well be perfectly legal, but it does
tend to support the "membership isn't in control, or even aware, and things
are being done behind the scenes" feelings, and all the dealings you had
outside of meetings with the Gillilands and Keith which were never related
to the membership (not saying they should be...again, it's more of a feel
issue than a logic one...more "unseen hand" stuff).  There's just obviously
stuff going on that the membership isn't being included in until it's all
settled.  Doing research ahead of time is fine, but options should be
presented and discussed, not final plans presented for rubberstamping at
meetings if you want to avoid this feeling continuing.

> >Even if the club doesn't fracture into multiple smaller
> >clubs, perhaps too small to be viable, it is likely to lose members as some
> >of us just get sick of the whole mess and decide to spend our free time on
> >something that is actually fun...which this sort of thing is NOT.
>
>I agree.  Yet fan clubs seem extremely susceptible that this.  Any
>suggestions for how we can avoid fracturing?

Yes...see above.  Follow the bylaws strictly.  Do everything openly.  Be as
inclusive as possible with everything (the list, the meetings, all things
club-related).  Don't ignore problems and hope they will go away, or refuse
to deal with them openly just because it might be painful (either to the
club, or to anyone in it).  As the recent fracas should show, that may well
result in far more pain and damage in the long run.  If something was
discussed between meetings, describe what was said...what options came up
and what was good or bad about them that led to the result chosen, or the
option being presented for approval.  Don't just say, "we talked it over
and decided that we should do X".

Rebecca's idea of an Ombudsman might be worth considering...an appointed,
or better, elected, position or three that is there to take complaints and
grievances, who can investigate all sides, and try to negotiate a
satisfactory resolution, and if not, who can present the issues fairly to
the club as a whole for determination of what to do about it, probably
without saying who is involved so that the decision can be made on the
facts, not personalities.  The person in this role needs to be calm, fair,
rational, diplomatic, and most importantly, trusted by all parties
involved.  That's one reason why there should usually be more than one of
them...in case an ombudsman is the problem in a situation. ;-)

I don't know if setting this sort of thing up would require a bylaw change
or not.  In other groups I've been in, the bylaws do establish the method
of electing/appointing, the responsibilities and the powers, and the
positions are often elected ones along with the other club officers, but
are sometimes appointed positions too.  Elected seems to work better, as
the membership needs to trust the ombudsmen, and they should not exist at
the whim of the other officers since sometimes the greivance is against
those other officers.

I think I understand why you handled things as you did, and are doing. I'm
just offering advice and suggestions here.  I'm not in charge.  I do hope
you'll consider what I'm saying, even if only as a sign that there are
problems to be addressed.

-- Mike B.
--
Yeah, I know it's dangerous, but think of the experience points.