[clug] [wet] Re: Scope of list (was An alternate place for longer, meandering threads?)

[Robert Edwards]

Alex Satrapa wrote:
> On 16/09/2009, at 12:10 , Robert Edwards wrote:
> 
>> CLUG is the Canberra Linux Users Group, by which _I_ understand:
>> - Canberra and surrounding region (Southern NSW)
> 
> Don't forget the ex-pat Canberrans who are now living in civilisations 
> far afield such as Sydney or Perth! I hear some of us have even lived in 
> the USA for a while!
> 

Thanks for your comments, Alex.

I certainly didn't/don't forget the ex-pats. See my original post. I
greatly value them keeping in contact with us.

> I don't think limiting the subscriber base artificially is going to help 
> prevent unsubscription rates as much as teaching people to be polite in 
> their public discussions. Such as, for example, not naming and shaming 
> people when a simple statement along the lines of, "I was disappointed 
> by a participant who looked around the room and quipped, 'No women here! 
> guess we don't have to watch our language'" would have carried the same 
> message. The offender can take their own time about realising the 
> comment was about them. Everyone else can be aware that there was this 
> *behaviour* as opposed to this *person* who was causing discomfort, and 
> in the meantime we're not left in the awkward situation of people airing 
> their dirty laundry in public.
> 

I completely agree, although this has nothing really to do with me or
my post that you are responding to.

> Along with exhorting people to "check their privilege", it might also be 
> worth reminding people that other people have feelings to deal with. 
> Getting along with other people is harder than getting Windows and Linux 
> to share files, folks.
> 
> As far as the different user groups go CLUG meetings are from all 
> reports that I've heard, by far the worst when it comes to opinionated 
> arguments by people who will not admit that they have made mistakes, or 
> have an opinion which doesn't have basis in real-world facts (as opposed 
> to Truth, which is entirely subjective). This is quite separate from the 
> long-winded discussions that some people like to have when playing 
> philosophical games.
> 

Can you provide any examples of these opinionated arguments etc. during
the main CLUG meetings? Come to think of it, I believe that we may have
missed you at these meetings for quite a while now. Oh well.

> So here we are, Canberrans, the worst drivers in the country (short of 
> Western Australians' collective fear of merging lanes), with the 
> strongest opinions and political awareness of any society in the nation, 
> and some of the blokes will have graduated from University having never 
> realised that women actually existed outside of Ralph magazine or the 
> K-Mart catalogue.
> 

Is any of this paragraph backed up by _any_ evidence, or even relevant?

> We have plenty of issues to discuss, regardless of where we are 
> currently located. Some of them are related to Linux and the greater 
> community of Linux users. Other issues are not related at all. If 
> someone outside the greater Canberra enclave has an opinion on these 
> issues, I have no qualms about them expressing it - especially if they 
> can help uncover the uncomfortable Truths that we have come to accept in 
> our big country town culture.
> 

Which is why I suggested those people sending us a link to an existing
thread elsewhere, or similar reference.

> We can't solve social problems (threadnoughts on sexism as the prime 
> example) through technical means. Social problems require people to 
> speak up and say, "hey, that behaviour is not acceptable." Whether it's 
> sexism or <common enemy>-bashing, it's just not cricket. However, let's 
> not focus on what kind of behaviours are not acceptable on this list. 
> Rather let us take the lead from those projects whose communities we 
> admire, and encourage the behaviours that are desired.
> 
> If someone offends you, take it up with them in private - or at worst 
> describe the offensive behaviour or opinion on the list, leaving names 
> out to separate the offensive behaviour from the person. In the 
> meantime, remember to thank people (publicly) for the help they give 
> you. Shame privately, praise publicly.
> 

I don't think anyone has actually offended me (I am, however, a member
of all identified privileged groups, and a few others thrown in to boot,
so maybe I am harder to offend?).

I think I did, in passing, publicly praise some people (not by name)
for the help they gave me when once I was a newbie in a separate thread
earlier today. Should I now name all those I can remember who helped me?

> Apologies for the essay.
> 

Not a bad effort.

> Alex
> 

Cheers,
Bob Edwards.