[clug] Resuming Normal Transmission: making CLUG an enjoyable, exciting forum again

[steve jenkin]

 CLUG is a remarkable group in many ways - one of which is 25+ years of demonstrated Tolerance & Helpfulness on the list and at meetings - and IMO we should pause and celebrate that exceptional achievement.

Canberra also “punches above its weight” in Open Source. Both in sheer volume and importance - the amount of high-quality, useful Open Source contributed to the world over 25 years should be a source of pride.

It’s not accidental that we may have more paid Open Source contributors (coders, testers, writers, PM’s, designers…) per person than anywhere else in Australia. Though New Zealand may now have the drop on us.

I think it’s a phenomenal track-record and not accidental, arising from shared & lived community values originating with CLUG.

It was only today I discovered the recent upheaval on the list when the CLUG list finally found its limits of tolerance to poor behaviour.

The group, individually & collectively, now has to choose to “Become the Best Version of Ourselves” or admit it’s changed and settle on a new character.

I don’t wish people withdraw into “being protective” and focussing on walking on eggshells, avoiding all possible offence.
We shouldn’t  stop being ourselves and ‘doing Linux’, whatever it is this week. People can make mistakes and offering sincere apologies should be enough for everyone to move on.

A Code of Conduct is a guide, but no replacement for good will and a willingness to forgive.

While a Code is generally A Good Thing, its not without downsides. They are a tool that can be misused by those of ill will.
These can, and have,  been used misused as instruments to subvert and/or take-over organisations.

I’m not suggesting “don’t have a Code”, rather try not having to resort to enforcing it again.
Perhaps by doing things a little differently, a little earlier.
Early intervention with posts considered disruptive or unhelpful might work, with specific suggestions of how to rephrase posts to be constructive & helpful.
If posters are unwilling to accept early help & advice and change their approach, it is IMO, a violation of the Code of Conduct.

List membership is not a Right or a contracted service. It’s a gift, paid for by others run by volunteers and purely optional.
It’s for people to lose, not to demand access.


The assumption of “good intent” was always, IMO, part of the brilliance of the “no formal anything” approach of CLUG.

 - the CLUG culture was, consciously I thought, one of “demonstration”
		- show “we’re tolerant” by being tolerant.
		- don’t criticise ohters code/writing, show them yours and how much better it is.
		  If you don’t have one, build one, until you do, be silent.

 - the lack of positions, elections, money & rules meant “Players” who wanted to exercise power over people & things
	not only couldn’t “assume control” by being elected, there  was nobody to wield power over and nothing of value to control.

 - The “Be Helpful, Be Considerate or Be Silent” rule was by Demonstration.
	Open Source isn’t FREE stuff, it comes with implied two-way responsibilities, as outlined in the Debian Social Contract.
	CLUG is by definition about Open Source - the group and the list need to abide by those principles.

	 - Open Source requires Sharing, Both Ways, not ripping off, exploiting or claiming false ownership eg. the “SCO Case”.

	   The SCO case was a milestone in other ways:
		“PJ” created & informed a global Open Source community via GrokLaw, combining contributions from everywhere.
		The Judge ended up relying on PJ and the evidence she elicited & collated from the Community.
		IBM and other respondents alone could not have won the SCO case without PJ.
		The Open Source Community, enabled by PJ’s brilliance, stopped the lawsuit and put those patent trolls out of business.
		This showed the power of shared interest, co-operation and giving back. 
		We have to fight for our Democracy or lose it - for me, that was the lesson from Groklaw and the SCO case.


 - There used to be a focus in CLUG on “having fun”.
	Not an absence of making jokes at others expense or snide remarks & insults - the minimums of Acceptable Conduct -
	actually enjoying the technology, learning, sharing, experimenting and hearing about Really Interesting New Things.

	Part of which is people talking "Work In Progess” - the most interesting new stuff.
	By definition, it doesn’t come with polished presentations or done-to-death documentation. It’s lightweight and agile.
	It’s a lot of handwaving and trying to explain tricky points.



What I’ve valued about CLUG for years is the depth of knowledge, the willingness of people to help / share when asked and the absence of critiques or treaties on “There is But One True Way and No Other”.

Having Tridge around always made it difficult for people to play games of “I’m smarter than you” or “I know more than you”.

We all knew who the “smartest guy in the room” was, and he didn’t “big note” himself or belittle others - providing both a positive role model for newcomers and a reference point if anyone “tried it on”.

Many times I heard a unsolved question posed in a meeting and Tridge either knew an answer or why it shouldn’t be done, or within 5 minutes had developed a solution on the spot.
(such as reading & writing from an TCP socket with a bash script - a fast way to create a micro-server, albeit none too secure).

I don’t recall insults, ‘corrections’, malice or one-up-manship on the list - just a shared interest and love of learning / exploring technology.

If anyone cares, this was an email I sent to the list some years ago suggesting Bryan, as a newcomer, could be good for the list and how to do that.

<https://lists.samba.org/archive/linux/2015-April/034225.html>
<https://lists.samba.org/archive/linux/2015-April/034232.html>


In an off-list email in early August 2015 [at end], I shared my opinions of BK with a couple of people he’d just targeted.
The long-term continuation of his bad behaviour - and it’s escalation over time - made me suspect that his goals weren’t “socialising” or “learning linux”, at least included disruption and provocation.

Is he “on the spectrum”? I don’t think that matters or is particularly relevant - we’re not his treating practitioners and they haven’t approached us with specific requests, or approached us in any way I’m aware of. [Does that make anyone else wonder why?]

Our actions display our motives and goals and I cannot remember a single instance where BK was truly helpful and moved the conversation forward. For the volume of posts and timeframe, that’s quite an accomplishment.

As a Newbie searching for appropriate resources - and apparently not finding any, I’d have expected him in The Open Source Way to have put together a “What I wished I had when I started" resource.

With the collective knowledge & experience of the group, this could’ve become a very useful thing, growing over time as his knowledge and interests developed.
If this was started 5 years, it would now be a highly polished and useful resource - something to be proud of & valuable to hundreds of others - and would’ve won the author great respect, even created invites to Linux conferences to talk about it and their experience creating it.

As I began, CLUG is a truly remarkable group in many ways - one of which is 25+ years of demonstrated Tolerance & Helpfulness.

A strong case can be made that the group and its members have made significant contributions to Open Source over 25 years.
For a small city, this is exceptional.

I think it’s a phenomenal track-record and not accidental, arising from the shared & lived community values, the embodiment of Open Source principles.

regards
steve

================

Message extract, 2015:

> If you haven’t worked it out already, Bryan is a troll. Ignore him if you want to remain sane.
> 
> He doesn’t add value to these conversations. [Confirm that for yourself].
> He’s not a member of CLUG to learn Linux, do Open Source or contribute to the group: have a look at his posts and questions.
> 
> His version is that he’s got a disorder like “Asperger’s” that makes him “tone deaf” to others emotions.
> I don’t see that.
> 
> He purposefully needles people, disparages others and injects rather insulting and pejorative ideas. Or flat-out complains. These are _not_ the behaviours of people with Asperger’s syndrome. Yes, they can be difficult to deal with because they’ll don’t “filter” - this isn’t the same.
> 
> I cannot recall him once offering any positive suggestion or direct offers of help.
> 
> His role in this conversation has been to derail it, to blame the victim and to raise his paranoia [Govt depts set out to bankrupt ppl].


--
Steve Jenkin, IT Systems and Design 
0412 786 915 (+61 412 786 915)
PO Box 38, Kippax ACT 2615, AUSTRALIA

mailto:sjenkin at canb.auug.org.au http://members.tip.net.au/~sjenkin