First meeting of the proposed Internet User Group of Ireland (IUGI)
p u l s e
First meeting of the proposed Internet User Group of Ireland (IUGI)
2pm: The meeting began with chairmen Niall O'Keeffe and Howard
Brittain introducing themselves and giving a general run-down on the
idea of the group.
Questions came from the floor immediately, some accusatory - some not,
concerning Howard and Niall's motives in setting up such a
meeting/such a group, and much time was wasted in petty arguing over
such motives, what the group was to be and the wording of its
policies, etc.
The meeting, although planned (and well planned at that) by Howard
Brittain and Niall O'Keeffe to be an introductory gathering deciding
on where we stand on important issues and voting on a proposed
charter, quickly transformed itself into (rather than "degenerated
into") a heated discussion forum, with much focus put on the role that
the ISP user groups currently play in the Irish Internet industry and
their potential role in/with such a national organisation as the IUGI.
The 16 people who showed up at the meeting decided democratically that
the "Draft Charter" would not even be an issue for the time being and
would not be considered for discussion or adoption for quite some time
(at either the next meeting, or the next one after that). The
following proposals/motions were proposed and tabled for voting:
1> It is proposed that such an organisation as the Internet User Group
of Ireland, as discussed in this meeting of Saturday February 27th
1999, being a much needed body, and an idea and organisation worthy of
our support - shall here and now be brought into existence with an
initial membership of all those in agreement with this motion.
Proposed by Conor Murray, seconded by Niall O'Keeffe
Voted for by a show of hands:
16 people present, 16 FOR, 0 AGAINST, 0 ABSTAINED
MOTION CONSIDERED TO BE CARRIED
2> It is proposed that this organisation decide on whether to exist in
the capacity of an umbrella group for the existing Internet Service
Provider (ISP) User Groups or whether to exist solely as an
Independent organisation with affiliation to (contacts in) the ISP
Groups.
Proposed by: Paul Cunnane, seconded by Conor Murray
Voted for by a show of hands:
16 people present, 16 FOR, 0 AGAINST, 0 ABSTAINED
MOTION CONSIDERED TO BE CARRIED
3> It is proposed that the organisation now in existence (due to the
vote in motion #1 above) form an Interim Committee with duties and
objectives regarding the running and setting up of the organisation,
the life-span of such a committee to be limited to the time between
Saturday February 27th 1999 and the date of the next meeting, which
has yet to be decided at this date.
Proposed by: Niall O'Keeffe, seconded by Howard Brittain
Voted for by a show of hands:
16 people present, 15 FOR, 0 AGAINST, 1 ABSTAINED
MOTION CONSIDERED TO BE CARRIED
While not necessarily being voted on, the following was also decided
and agreed upon by general consensus:
a> The group is to be set up as an "association" rather than a "User
Group".
b> The Interim committee, made up of volunteers and chaired by Howard
Brittain (who was proposed for the position by Gavin Henrick, seconded
by Garret Flynn and voted for by 16 to 0) have the following
responsibilities between now and the next meeting:
* Develop a contact list - contacts in ISP's, College Internet
administrators, ISP User Groups, pressure groups, Govt. agencies, etc.
* Set up a public forum for discussion (web message boards, List
server, Mailing list, website, etc.)
* Discuss formation of a document with suggestions for a proposed
charter in advance of the next meeting.
* Decide upon a time and place for the next meeting.
* Arrange and promote the next meeting when a time is decided upon.
c> The group is to accept INDIVIDUAL membership only. This does not
mean that corporate users cannot become members, but it does mean that
they will have exactly the same privelages and membership rights as
individual/home users as there is to be no special membership option
for business users.
--
This message will be posted to ie.general and ie.announce on the Irish
newsgroup network as well as to the temporary IUGI website at
http://acs.ie/iugi . It will also be sent to all the members of the
Interim Committee.
--
Niall O'Keeffe
--
IUGI: iu...@acs.ie
WEB : http://acs.ie/iugi
Paul Cunnane
>First meeting of the proposed Internet User Group of Ireland (IUGI)
>2> It is proposed that this organisation decide on whether to exist in
>the capacity of an umbrella group for the existing Internet Service
>Provider (ISP) User Groups or whether to exist solely as an
>Independent organisation with affiliation to (contacts in) the ISP
>Groups.
Um. This was a tad confusing at the time, and again here. The motion
(not being a yes/no issue as such) was carried in favour of the
independent option, rather than the umbrella group.
----------------------------------------------
Paul Cunnane paulcunnane at hotmail
(the address in the header is kinda backwards)
----------------------------------------------
p u l s e
Cunnane) wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Mar 1999 17:44:05 GMT, i...@my.website (p u l s e) wrote:
>
>>First meeting of the proposed Internet User Group of Ireland (IUGI)
>
>>2> It is proposed that this organisation decide on whether to exist in
>>the capacity of an umbrella group for the existing Internet Service
>>Provider (ISP) User Groups or whether to exist solely as an
>>Independent organisation with affiliation to (contacts in) the ISP
>>Groups.
>
>Um. This was a tad confusing at the time, and again here. The motion
>(not being a yes/no issue as such) was carried in favour of the
>independent option, rather than the umbrella group.
Sorry - I didn't make that clear. You are absolutely right, of course.
Slán,
Niall O'Keeffe (Pulse)
-----------------------
Web: www.niall.okeeffe.com
Email: Remove ".trousers"
mystery
>
>First meeting of the proposed Internet User Group of Ireland (IUGI)
<snip>
>Questions came from the floor immediately, some accusatory - some not,
>concerning Howard and Niall's motives in setting up such a
>meeting/such a group, and much time was wasted in petty arguing over
>such motives, what the group was to be and the wording of its
>policies, etc.
Hmmm... a wee bit less subjectivity next time, please. This was not
"petty arguing" - it was debate.
>The meeting, although planned (and well planned at that) by Howard
>Brittain and Niall O'Keeffe to be an introductory gathering deciding
>on where we stand on important issues and voting on a proposed
>charter, quickly transformed itself into (rather than "degenerated
>into") a heated discussion forum, with much focus put on the role that
>the ISP user groups currently play in the Irish Internet industry and
>their potential role in/with such a national organisation as the IUGI.
Most people only saw the proposed charter for the first time as the
meeting commenced. 75% of those present were members of existing
usergroups or ISP employees or both.
<snip>
>16 people present, 16 FOR, 0 AGAINST, 0 ABSTAINED
>MOTION CONSIDERED TO BE CARRIED
<snip>
>16 people present, 16 FOR, 0 AGAINST, 0 ABSTAINED
>MOTION CONSIDERED TO BE CARRIED
<snip>
>16 people present, 15 FOR, 0 AGAINST, 1 ABSTAINED
>MOTION CONSIDERED TO BE CARRIED
Yikes, 1 abstention. It was gory stuff!
But what I really want to know is.... where were all the people from
ie.general? If we usergroupies hadn't sent our spies along it would
have been a *very* small meeting. Shame on yez!
mystery
--
SPAM/UCE storage - US$100 per item, payable on delivery, delivery signifies
acceptance of terms, non-payment is theft. All other mail is processed FOC.
ho...@netbox.com
> Hmmm... a wee bit less subjectivity next time, please. This was not
> "petty arguing" - it was debate.
I agree, M. This was a great meeting. Debate, disagreement, emotions
and finally an excellent level of consensus.
> But what I really want to know is.... where were all the people from
> ie.general? If we usergroupies hadn't sent our spies along it would
> have been a *very* small meeting. Shame on yez!
That's it. If people choose to snipe from the sidelines and then don't
follow through, then their views will most probably receive the
attention they deserve as a result.
Howard brittain
interim chairman
If people have views or contributions that they do not wish to post to
the group for any reason, please post them to me @ ho...@netbox.com
Tom Cosgrave
the next one!
Tom
--
Tom Cosgrave The Corrs Links Page + FAQ
t...@indigo.ie http://www.thecorrs.org/links
Proponent for rec.autos.sport.f1.moderated
Tellybubby Funland
http://www.newgrounds.com/tubby/index.html
nitro
> Good work dudes, I'm still on for htis to happen, and if I can, I'll be at
> the next one!
Conor,
Next one will be a committee meeting and the next 'open' meeting will
hopefully be in May/June - a high promotion public meeting.
Howard
Tom Cosgrave
nitro wrote in message <1do48rf.1w0...@ts07-008.dublin.indigo.ie>...
Eh :-) I'm Tom :-)
I would like to give input to the comittee if I can.
Not saying I want to join it or have a major role, but I'd appreciate the
opportunity to tag along.
Daire Garvey
>Eh :-) I'm Tom :-)
>I would like to give input to the comittee if I can.
>Not saying I want to join it or have a major role, but I'd appreciate the
>opportunity to tag along.
I'm with Tom on this, I reckon it's a *wee* bit early to be getting all
cliquey and secretive - especially when there are other people who would
like to get involved - who for whatever reason were unable to make it to
the first meeting.
D.
(getting a real "nyah you weren't at the first meeting so you can't come
and play in our gang" kinda feelin.. sue me.)
p u l s e
wrote:
>Eh :-) I'm Tom :-)
And so you are!
>I would like to give input to the comittee if I can.
Well, as we said, an Interim Committee has already been formed, but it
will only exist until the next public meeting and I'm sure they'd
appreciate any help.
>Not saying I want to join it or have a major role, but I'd appreciate the
>opportunity to tag along.
Feel free.
>Tom
>--
>Tom Cosgrave The Corrs Links Page + FAQ
>t...@indigo.ie http://www.thecorrs.org/links
Can you bring the Corrs to the next meeting then? :)
Slán,
Niall O'Keeffe (pulse)
______________________
Website: www.niall.okeeffe.com
Email: niall AT okeeffe.com
These opinions are mine, and not necessarily those of my employer, my co-worker(s), my family or my personal fitness trainer.
nitro
> Eh :-) I'm Tom :-)
My error, Tom. Sorry 'bout that.
> I would like to give input to the comittee if I can.
> Not saying I want to join it or have a major role, but I'd appreciate the
> opportunity to tag along.
No one is trying to cut anyone out, Tom, but we have to progress in the
best way we can. We called a meeting and so many people on the
ie.general group who were the most vocal didn;t even bother turning up.
So we went ahead and had a very healthy and productive meeting with a
high level of consensus. We have established a procedure an a voting
system.
While we do now have a core group and an interim committee we are always
open to listening to what people have to say. Post to ie.general, the
web forum that we are planning to establish shortly or to me as interim
chairman at ho...@netbox.com.
Howard
nitro
> I'm with Tom on this, I reckon it's a *wee* bit early to be getting all
> cliquey and secretive - especially when there are other people who would
> like to get involved - who for whatever reason were unable to make it to
> the first meeting.
Hey Daire, ease up on this clique crap ok ? We announced a meeting well
in advance. We had an open discussion on usenet which will continue
here and in tandem with, hoperfully, a web forum. If people chose not
to turn up then give us a break from this idiotic griping from the
sidelines. 16 people gave up their saturday to turn up.
What secrets are you referring to ? what cliques are you referring to ?
And yes we are going to do this project properly. We are doing it right
and will succeed as a result, I hope. Doing it right doesn't mean
having a 'walk-in' committee which would cause chaos. The members of
the interim committee were VOTED in and that will remain the basis of
future progress. There will be plenty of opportunity to get involved at
the next stages which will come as soon as possible.
Howard
helena kim
>Hey Daire, ease up on this clique crap ok ? We announced a meeting well
>in advance. We had an open discussion on usenet which will continue
>here and in tandem with, hoperfully, a web forum. If people chose not
>to turn up then give us a break from this idiotic griping from the
>sidelines. 16 people gave up their saturday to turn up.
>
>What secrets are you referring to ? what cliques are you referring to ?
i believe he's referring to this:
On Thu, 4 Mar 1999 00:17:22 +0000, ni...@boom.com (nitro) wrote:
>Next one will be a committee meeting and the next 'open' meeting will
>hopefully be in May/June - a high promotion public meeting.
which, call me crazy, does give the impression of 'we've made the
commitee. if you weren't there, sorry.'
i totally commend the people who made it on saturday. i, regrettably,
couldn't be there. i only got the announcement confirming the date the
thursday before, and amazingly, people do make plans. :)
:helena kim
'it's sink or swim mailto:hel...@netsoc.tcd.ie
they're looking in' http://www.netsoc.tcd.ie/~helena
- stereophonics 0872800160
p u l s e
wrote:
>i believe he's referring to this:
>
>On Thu, 4 Mar 1999 00:17:22 +0000, ni...@boom.com (nitro) wrote:
>>Next one will be a committee meeting and the next 'open' meeting will
>>hopefully be in May/June - a high promotion public meeting.
>
>which, call me crazy, does give the impression of 'we've made the
>commitee. if you weren't there, sorry.'
Not at all, Helena- the committee will only be in place *UNTIL THE
NEXT MEETING* as we have stressed OVER and OVER and will only exist in
the capacity of promoting the organisation, promoting discussion of
all relevant topics and arranging the next meeting.
>
>i totally commend the people who made it on saturday. i, regrettably,
>couldn't be there. i only got the announcement confirming the date the
>thursday before, and amazingly, people do make plans. :)
Thanks... although I thought you'd be there and was looking forward to
hearing your opinion in a live face-to-face forum... we'll see you at
the next one as soon as the INTERIM committee decides on when and
where, I expect...
Tom Cosgrave
nitro wrote in message <1do5gd6.v8...@ts04-037.dublin.indigo.ie>...
>
>No one is trying to cut anyone out, Tom, but we have to progress in the
>best way we can. We called a meeting and so many people on the
>ie.general group who were the most vocal didn;t even bother turning up.
I have arthritis....it was sorta hard for me, coz I'm not walking well right
now.
It's not that I couldn't be arsed, I could.
Please cut me a little slack.
The next time you organise a meeting, how about you ask around for the best
date - and mail *me* to ask please - I am definitely interested.
Tom
--
Tom Cosgrave The Corrs Links Page + FAQ
t...@indigo.ie http://www.thecorrs.org/links
Proponent for rec.autos.sport.f1.moderated
Tellybubby Funland
http://www.newgrounds.com/tubby/index.html
Tom Cosgrave
p u l s e wrote in message <36df18fa...@news1.tinet.ie>...
>
>Thanks... although I thought you'd be there and was looking forward to
>hearing your opinion in a live face-to-face forum... we'll see you at
>the next one as soon as the INTERIM committee decides on when and
>where, I expect...
I just hope the interim committee, asks us where we'd like it.
nitro
> >What secrets are you referring to ? what cliques are you referring to ?
>
> i believe he's referring to this:
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 1999 00:17:22 +0000, ni...@boom.com (nitro) wrote:
> >Next one will be a committee meeting and the next 'open' meeting will
> >hopefully be in May/June - a high promotion public meeting.
>
> which, call me crazy, does give the impression of 'we've made the
> commitee. if you weren't there, sorry.'
Excuse me Helena . . so you are saying that the establishment of a
committee by the people who did show up was a secretive or cliqueish act
? This must be parallel universe stuff.
Howard
nitro
> >No one is trying to cut anyone out, Tom, but we have to progress in the
> >best way we can. We called a meeting and so many people on the
> >ie.general group who were the most vocal didn;t even bother turning up.
> >So we went ahead and had a very healthy and productive meeting with a
> >high level of consensus. We have established a procedure an a voting
> >system.
>
> Fair play for getting the thing on the first rung, but give up on the
> 'defensive' stuff will you? People do have lives outside the net, so
> some people who contributed comments a week or two back didn't make it
> to the meeting? That doesn't make them not interested in IUGI. AFAIR,
> these are some of the people IUGI is being established for.
I am losing all understanding of language here . . if I answer
accusations of being cut out of actions and of being secretive and
cliqueish I am being 'defensive' ? I believe in people's right to
criticise and my right to answer those criticisms. Get used to it,
David.
I made no criticism of people who did not make the meeting. I commented
on complaints from people who did not attend about us moving ahead. If
we don;t move ahead in a structured and systematic way this project will
never ever work. We cannot go at the pace of the slowest in the class,
we must press on and get the job done.. We have cut out no one, excluded
no one, ignored no one. We have invited everyone to contribute and
comment and take part. Now why can't all this effort be expended on the
issues and structures of the organisation we need to put in place.
Howard Brittain
nitro
> I have arthritis....it was sorta hard for me, coz I'm not walking well right
> now.
> It's not that I couldn't be arsed, I could.
> Please cut me a little slack.
You are implying I criticised ou for not attending. I commented on
people not attending and then complaining that we went ahead and took
decisions. There is a huge difference, Tom. We were very disappointed
so many did not turn up.
> The next time you organise a meeting, how about you ask around for the best
> date - and mail *me* to ask please - I am definitely interested.
I personally posted several posts in the pervious weeks asking people
about weekday or weekend meeting dates. I dod not know how much more
can be done.
The next public meeting will hopefully be extensively publicised ina ll
the media.
Howard Brittain
Tom Cosgrave
nitro wrote in message <1do6441.lh8...@ts06-102.dublin.indigo.ie>...
>
>You are implying I criticised ou for not attending
Sorry - just a little grumpy tonight.
You're doing a great job.
mystery
>>What secrets are you referring to ? what cliques are you referring to ?
>
>i believe he's referring to this:
>
>On Thu, 4 Mar 1999 00:17:22 +0000, ni...@boom.com (nitro) wrote:
>>Next one will be a committee meeting and the next 'open' meeting will
>>hopefully be in May/June - a high promotion public meeting.
The formation of the interim committe was suggested by the
usergroupies (this is my term for what pulse refers to as "ISP
Usergroups") because there was no representation for large sectors of
the 'net community at the preliminary meeting.
The interim committees's objectives are to promote public awareness
and discussion of the proposed group's proposed (!) charter and to
publicise and arrange a new meeting which will be attended by a
broader spectrum of 'net users and interested parties.
The interim committee will cease to exist after this meeting. Its only
purpose is to prepare the ground for this meeting. All of the issues
to be decided on (this extends even to the name of the group - I
prefer IIUG) will be presented to this meeting. A new committee with
more power will also be elected from those present.
It is necessary for the sake of getting things done for the interim
committee to have meeting(s). There is not a lot of point in getting
more people involved in these meetings as they will be focused purely
on the business of planning the next public meeting and raising
people's awareness of it. This committee has absolutely no legislative
function or power.
I am not a member of the interim committee but will be keeping a close
eye on it.
>which, call me crazy, does give the impression of 'we've made the
>commitee. if you weren't there, sorry.'
That's not the case at all. The "minutes" of the preliminary meeting
mention the fact that the co-chairs intended to have that meeting vote
upon a charter. This idea was shot down by the usergroupies because of
the non-inclusive nature of that meeting. The interim committee was
formed from 8 volunteers with the acceptance of the rest of those
present, under the condition (agreed by all) that it be disbanded and
replaced by an elected committee at the next public meeting.
>i totally commend the people who made it on saturday. i, regrettably,
>couldn't be there. i only got the announcement confirming the date the
>thursday before, and amazingly, people do make plans. :)
There will be plenty of warning before the true inaugural meeting.
Daire Garvey
>>which, call me crazy, does give the impression of 'we've made the
>>commitee. if you weren't there, sorry.'
>Not at all, Helena- the committee will only be in place *UNTIL THE
>NEXT MEETING* as we have stressed OVER and OVER and will only exist in
>the capacity of promoting the organisation, promoting discussion of
>all relevant topics and arranging the next meeting.
Regardless - from my point of view, 16 of you got together, formed a
committee and now have no interest in the direct (as opposed to
comments on news groups or board) input or participation by anyone else
for the next 4 months! I mean COME ON!
There are a lot of people here who want to get involved, and believe they
could make a positive contribution to the IUGI - Helena, Tom and myself
included, and we're being told "No, sorry, you weren't at the meeting, so
we're not interested."
So we who had prior engagements last saturday are now stuck on the
'outside' looking in. Who's on the committee? What are their individual
tasks? What are they going to be doing? We don't know. Way to go in
polarizing those interested in this group before it even got off the
ground.
How do plan on "promoting the discussion of all relevant topics" if you're
not planning any meetings until may/june?
In my opinion, we need more public meetings *now* and continuously, rather
than relying on this news group, mailing lists, boards or anything else to
get people involved. You're just fostering an "Us" and "Them" situation.
D.
Howard Britain
Niall:
> >Not at all, Helena- the committee will only be in place *UNTIL THE
> >NEXT MEETING* as we have stressed OVER and OVER and will only exist in
> >the capacity of promoting the organisation, promoting discussion of
> >all relevant topics and arranging the next meeting.
>
> Regardless - from my point of view, 16 of you got together, formed a
> committee and now have no interest in the direct (as opposed to
> comments on news groups or board) input or participation by anyone else
> for the next 4 months! I mean COME ON!
Come on yourself, Daire. And I'll throw in 'get a grip' too, since your
so attached to your cliches. What the heck do you expect people to do
who want to get an organisation off the ground. We invited interested
people to get together and voted in an action committee. Now you're
ticked off you can't just jump in at your own convenience.
And where are you coming from with this four months stuff ? No one has
mentioned anything like that afaik. We said that we will be having
committee meetings over the next month or so and will be following
through on the voted decisions taken at the 27th feb meeting, together
with views expressed during the discussion period prior to then, to
prepare the ground for a major launch and public meeting in May or June.
In the meantime we are creating forums for people to get involved by
airing and exchanging views and opinions.
> There are a lot of people here who want to get involved, and believe they
> could make a positive contribution to the IUGI - Helena, Tom and myself
> included, and we're being told "No, sorry, you weren't at the meeting, so
> we're not interested."
So what do you expect us to do ? sit around for another year until
everyone decides to call in and turn up in person ? or maybe have a
permanent 'open' committee that meets every week but doesn't make any
decisions or take any actions because one particular person or other
didn't make it and we don't want to be accused of being cliqueish or
secretive ?
Come on. We're trying to do something worthwhile here and get something
worthwhile off the ground once and for all.
Why not have the tiniest bit of patience and wait for the interim
committee to put together some plans for the next steps to be taken.
> So we who had prior engagements last saturday are now stuck on the
> 'outside' looking in. Who's on the committee? What are their individual
> tasks?
The tasks of the interim committee were posted earlier this week.
> What are they going to be doing?
Read the post..
> We don't know.
Read the post.
> Way to go in
> polarizing those interested in this group before it even got off the
> ground.
It seems to me that we are doing our best to create an organisation for
the benefit of all users in Ireland and doing it in an organised and
open fashion. If you feel polarised then perhaps it is because you are
polarising yourself.
> How do plan on "promoting the discussion of all relevant topics" if you're
> not planning any meetings until may/june?
All topics and subjects will be open to discussion on this newsgroup as
well on the web forum which will be established as soon as possible, as
has been stated several times on this group.
> In my opinion, we need more public meetings *now* and continuously, rather
> than relying on this news group, mailing lists, boards or anything else to
> get people involved.
Well that is your opinion and we will take that into consideration along
with everyone else's opinions.
> You're just fostering an "Us" and "Them" situation.
If 'us' means those trying to be constructive and organised and willing
to give up personal time, then so be it. If 'them' means people
unwilling to make a single constructive comment except except gripe and
snipe and grumble and whinge about those willing to take action without
waiting for another year to pass, then so be it also.
Howard Brittain
Howard Britain
> The "minutes" of the preliminary meeting
> mention the fact that the co-chairs intended to have that meeting vote
> upon a charter. This idea was shot down by the usergroupies because of
> the non-inclusive nature of that meeting.
It is regretable that the facts of the 27th Feb meeting are already
being distorted and misrepresented.
At this meeting a paper was distributed that Niall and I worked on in
advance of the meeting. It was headed "Draft Charter Issues for
Discussion".
Another 'fact' was that the co-chairs, Niall and I, expressly stated at
the meeting that it was our own personal opinion that these issues
should be for discussion only and no votes should be taken on any of
these issues but that comments and views be aired and suggestions for
other issues not included in this list be made, and the collected issues
be carried forward to future meetings.
It IS true that most if not all of the attendees, who were mainly people
already involved in ISP user groups would not allow these issues to be
discussed. They clearly had a different agenda on how the meeting
should progress than Niall and I. But that's life.
As a democratic meeting we discussed and argued these points and came to
a consensus which I believe everyone at the meeting was happy with.
It would be far more constructive if we spent a little more time trying
to move foreward than trying to score points on past arguments. All of
the decisions taken at that meeting were 16 to nil or 15 to 1
abstention. Do we really want to tear this consensus up and end up back
where we started ?
No one has even made an attempt to discuss or comment on a single issue
in the minutes of the meeting or any other issue relevant to how we
should proceed with the organisation. Also I would suggest that we
allow the committee to at least have a first meeting and see what comes
out of that before we completely disintegrate :)
Howard Brittain
Colin Polykett
Garvey) wrote:
>Regardless - from my point of view, 16 of you got together, formed a
>committee and now have no interest in the direct (as opposed to
>comments on news groups or board) input or participation by anyone else
>for the next 4 months! I mean COME ON!
I have no interest in the IUGI (other than hoping it continues to
provide the laughs that it is at present), but you lot are unreal.
My reading of it so far :
A group get together and announce a meeting. 16 people turn up.
Those there decide a few of them should get their heads together to
organise and promote the next meeting. A full report of the initial
meeting is made back to a wider audience.
Result :
Wider audience who weren't at the meeting all want to be in the
'select few' that will organise and promote the next meeting, and all
say they'll turn up this time, honest guv. One of the original
attendees explains things, and gets heckled again for explaining
things.
I predict that by the next meeting you'll have split in the 'Internet
User Group of Ireland (IUGI)' and the 'Irish Internet Users Group
(IIUG)'. You'l then spend half of the next meeting standing on
opposite sides of the hall/pub/hotel shouting 'Splitter' at each
other.
Go on, have a go at me instead and stop squabbling amongst yourselves.
PS. Anyone want to join the 'Goup of Irish Internet Users' forum I'm
forming ?
helena kim
> And where are you coming from with this four months stuff ? No one has
> mentioned anything like that afaik. We said that we will be having
> committee meetings over the next month or so and will be following
> through on the voted decisions taken at the 27th feb meeting, together
> with views expressed during the discussion period prior to then, to
> prepare the ground for a major launch and public meeting in May or June.
as i had seen it, you had a meeting and formed an interim committee from
the people who were able to be present.
fair enough.
then you stated (somewhere, i'm in college atm and can't find the post)
that the next few meetings would be committee meetings and the next open
meeting would be in may/june.
this, therefore, gave yours truly the impression that since i wasn't at
the first meeting, i am not on the committee, and won't be able to help
(which is really what i *want* to do) until may/june, by which stage
charters, etc will all be decided.
this has since been cleared up, and i do intend to go to the next
committee meeting, even though i'm not on the committee. :)
come on everybody now...
hold hands and let's belt out a round of 'kum ba yah'...
:helena 'why can't we all play
together nicely' kim
'it's sink or swim http://www.netsoc.tcd.ie/~helena
they're looking in' mailto:hel...@netsoc.tcd.ie
- stereophonics 0872800160
p u l s e
Garvey) wrote:
>pu...@tinet.trousers.ie (p u l s e) writes:
>
>>>which, call me crazy, does give the impression of 'we've made the
>>>commitee. if you weren't there, sorry.'
>
>>Not at all, Helena- the committee will only be in place *UNTIL THE
>>NEXT MEETING* as we have stressed OVER and OVER and will only exist in
>>the capacity of promoting the organisation, promoting discussion of
>>all relevant topics and arranging the next meeting.
>
>Regardless - from my point of view, 16 of you got together, formed a
>committee and now have no interest in the direct (as opposed to
>comments on news groups or board) input or participation by anyone else
>for the next 4 months! I mean COME ON!
Emm... that is incorrect. The opposite is correct. We have interest in
any contribution anyone could make.
>There are a lot of people here who want to get involved,
Good - so stop arguing about it and GET involved!!!
Robert Fahey
<ni...@boom.com> writes
>Next one will be a committee meeting and the next 'open' meeting will
>hopefully be in May/June - a high promotion public meeting.
This posting seems to have sparked off some considerable controversy,
perhaps due to certain members of the interim committee getting a little
bit too defensive and bad-tempered.
The fact is, what I understood from the meeting, and what I will be
working towards as an interim committee member, is _two_ major meetings
in the near future - the first being a larger meeting organised by
contacting all the existing user groups and inviting them to send
representatives, as well as getting some more interested individuals
involved. This is the meeting that the Interim Committee are in
existence to create.
During that meeting, another committee will be elected, who will arrange
for the next meeting - being a large, well-promoted public meeting, at
which the IUGI will be formally founded. Everything until that meeting
is just preliminary work. That is the meeting that will most likely take
place in May/June - I would hope to see the next meeting, being the
smaller one, take place before the end of April, and I believe that this
was the target which we set ourselves at the last meeting.
Therefore, as you can see, there will be plenty of opportunity for those
interested to get involved. The Interim Committee is not a clique, we're
merely there to organise the next meeting and then get quietly
dissolved. And we will certainly be listening to comments and
suggestions from anyone and everyone as to the format or venue or date
of the next meeting, in an attempt to facilitate as many people as
possible.
There you go, ladies and gentlemen. That's as much as I know at the
moment, and I'm a committee member. So now you know as much as we do -
no secrets, just as it should be.
Mata ne!
Rob
--
Robert Fahey - rob...@iol.ie
SymbioSyS Software
IRC/Quake2/Web - 'Shinji-kun'
{"And the Lord spake unto the Angel at the gate, }
{ 'Where is your sword?' }
{ And the Angel did say, }
{ 'Oh... Er... it was here a minute ago...' }
{ And the Lord did not ask again." -[Good Omens] }
Current Listening: Castlevania X Soundtrack
p u l s e
(Colin Polykett) wrote:
>On 5 Mar 1999 12:22:17 -0000, da...@maedhbh.maths.tcd.ie (Daire
>Garvey) wrote:
>
>>Regardless - from my point of view, 16 of you got together, formed a
>>committee and now have no interest in the direct (as opposed to
>>comments on news groups or board) input or participation by anyone else
>>for the next 4 months! I mean COME ON!
>
>I have no interest in the IUGI (other than hoping it continues to
>provide the laughs that it is at present), but you lot are unreal.
>
>My reading of it so far :
>
>A group get together and announce a meeting. 16 people turn up.
>Those there decide a few of them should get their heads together to
>organise and promote the next meeting. A full report of the initial
>meeting is made back to a wider audience.
>
>Result :
>
>Wider audience who weren't at the meeting all want to be in the
>'select few' that will organise and promote the next meeting, and all
>say they'll turn up this time, honest guv. One of the original
>attendees explains things, and gets heckled again for explaining
>things.
<SNIP>
Colin... you're absolutely right... but do you know why?
...Because USENET is an awful place to hold these conversations - the
newsgroups bring out the worst in us all the time. That's why we had a
"LIVE" meeting, and basically - for anyone who wasn't there - tough!
There's nothing I or anyone can do about the fact that you weren't
there now so don't bother bitching and whining to me.
(That's putting it bluntly doncha think?) - THERE WILL BE FURTHER
MEETINGS, THERE WILL BE FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS... The committee is an
INTERIM committee only and will exist until the next meeting only so
whats everyone getting so uppity about not having the chance to be on
it for?
Read the INITIAL post on this subject (re the minutes, etc.) and you
will see what the duties of the committee are - basically promoting
and organising the NEXT meeting...
Calm down, everyone,...
Tom Cosgrave
Robert Fahey wrote in message ...
>
>There you go, ladies and gentlemen. That's as much as I know at the
>moment, and I'm a committee member. So now you know as much as we do -
>no secrets, just as it should be.
Now I'm happy :-)
Tom
--
Tom Cosgrave
tomcATteamsoftDOTie
http://www.teamsoft.ie
All opinions are mine and not my employers!
Robert Fahey
Britain <anc...@indigo.ie> writes
>At this meeting a paper was distributed that Niall and I worked on in
>advance of the meeting. It was headed "Draft Charter Issues for
>Discussion".
>It IS true that most if not all of the attendees, who were mainly people
>already involved in ISP user groups would not allow these issues to be
>discussed. They clearly had a different agenda on how the meeting
>should progress than Niall and I. But that's life.
And in fairness to Howard and Niall, they accepted that the opinion of
the majority was that the Draft Charter document was premature and
should not even be considered for discussion until the next meeting. All
those who attended were heard on the matter, so I don't think that the
meeting can be accused of being undemocratic or anything of the sort.
Howard and Niall clearly had a different view of what the organisation
would be to the view held by a lot of others at the meeting, but that's
just how these things work.
Robert Fahey
100...@apollo.netsoc.tcd.ie>, helena kim <hel...@apollo.netsoc.tcd.ie>
writes
>this, therefore, gave yours truly the impression that since i wasn't at
>the first meeting, i am not on the committee, and won't be able to help
>(which is really what i *want* to do) until may/june, by which stage
>charters, etc will all be decided.
Right. Charters etc. will *absolutely NOT* be decided behind closed
doors, but will be discussed publicly at the next open meeting. The
committee of 8 (or however many of us there are, I can't remember) will
be meeting to discuss the next meeting, that's a meeting that there
really isn't any point in anyone else attending since the points
discussed will be purely about the running of the next meeting. We will
not be deciding on a charter or anything of the sort.
Daire Garvey
>On 5 Mar 1999 12:22:17 -0000, da...@maedhbh.maths.tcd.ie (Daire
>Garvey) wrote:
>I predict that by the next meeting you'll have split in the 'Internet
>User Group of Ireland (IUGI)' and the 'Irish Internet Users Group
>(IIUG)'. You'l then spend half of the next meeting standing on
>opposite sides of the hall/pub/hotel shouting 'Splitter' at each
>other.
Yeah! What have the ISPs ever done for us?! :)
D.
Daire Garvey
>Come on yourself, Daire. And I'll throw in 'get a grip' too, since your
>so attached to your cliches.
Ah. A grammar flame. How cutting.
>What the heck do you expect people to do
>who want to get an organisation off the ground. We invited interested
>people to get together and voted in an action committee. Now you're
>ticked off you can't just jump in at your own convenience.
I and others would like a chance to attend open meetings to discuss the
IUGI with the new committee before any more progress is made. I believe it
is a mistake on the committee's part to wait until May/June before such
meetings take place.
>And where are you coming from with this four months stuff ? No one has
>mentioned anything like that afaik. We said that we will be having
>committee meetings over the next month or so and will be following
>through on the voted decisions taken at the 27th feb meeting, together
>with views expressed during the discussion period prior to then, to
>prepare the ground for a major launch and public meeting in May or June.
Lessee. March, April, May, June. 4 months, during which time there will be
no meetings to which non-committee members (users) will be able to come
along and discuss matters (the group). What I do not understand is why you
feel that there is no need for more public meetings at this stage - are
they such a bad thing?
>So what do you expect us to do ? sit around for another year until
>everyone decides to call in and turn up in person ? or maybe have a
>permanent 'open' committee that meets every week but doesn't make any
>decisions or take any actions because one particular person or other
>didn't make it and we don't want to be accused of being cliqueish or
>secretive ?
Don't be silly. I want an independant user group as much as you do - I
just have a problem with one that goes from "idea" to "nameless
committee members and non-public meetings" in the space of one weekend!
>If 'us' means those trying to be constructive and organised and willing
>to give up personal time, then so be it.
Oh for goodness sake, what do you want, a medal for turning up last
saturday? Well done, how committed of you. Hurrah for Howard. It's
this kind of attitude I'm against - where comments made by people like
myself (such as my belief that more public meetings would be a good thing)
are so derided:
>unwilling to make a single constructive comment except except gripe and
>snipe and grumble and whinge about those willing to take action without
>waiting for another year to pass, then so be it also.
If you can't understand that the work of the committee should proceed in
tandem with public meetings (progress meetings where the committe could
share their work to date), that doesn't mean that when someone suggests it
that they are "griping, sniping, grumbling and whinging". Get a clue.
(there's another cliche for you).
D.
Daire Garvey
>During that meeting, another committee will be elected, who will arrange
>for the next meeting - being a large, well-promoted public meeting, at
>which the IUGI will be formally founded. Everything until that meeting
>is just preliminary work. That is the meeting that will most likely take
>place in May/June - I would hope to see the next meeting, being the
>smaller one, take place before the end of April, and I believe that this
>was the target which we set ourselves at the last meeting.
Well that's more like it! Up to now the only meeting that had been
mentioned was the large public meeting with press/ISP user group
participation etc etc scheduled for May/June. I felt that it was wrong
for the committee not to hold public meetings to discuss the purpose of
the IUGI before it was publically founded and developed formal ties with
any other organisation. If this meeting is indeed to go ahead before the
end of April, then I think it's a Good Thing(tm). I'll certainly wander
along swap evil glances with that Howard bloke. :)
G'man Shin :) for giving us a coherant picture of what's going on. Cheers!
D.
Howard Britain
listening.
Howard
Robert Fahey <rob...@iol.ie> wrote:
> The fact is, what I understood from the meeting, and what I will be
> working towards as an interim committee member, is _two_ major meetings
> in the near future - the first being a larger meeting organised by
> contacting all the existing user groups and inviting them to send
> representatives, as well as getting some more interested individuals
> involved. This is the meeting that the Interim Committee are in
> existence to create.
>
>
Paul Cunnane
Garvey) wrote:
>I and others would like a chance to attend open meetings to discuss the
>IUGI with the new committee before any more progress is made. I believe it
>is a mistake on the committee's part to wait until May/June before such
>meetings take place.
It can't be stressed enough - the committee is an *interim* committee,
whose responsibility is basically limited to arranging precisely the
kind of meeting you are looking for. There is no other agenda. There
are no secrets. The lifetime of this committee is *strictly* limited
to the next public meeting.
>Lessee. March, April, May, June. 4 months, during which time there will be
>no meetings to which non-committee members (users) will be able to come
>along and discuss matters (the group). What I do not understand is why you
>feel that there is no need for more public meetings at this stage - are
>they such a bad thing?
It's a compromise thing. To throw the group wide open to an all-
encompassing debate would, at this stage, be premature, with the
inevitable result being chaos.
>Don't be silly. I want an independant user group as much as you do - I
>just have a problem with one that goes from "idea" to "nameless
>committee members and non-public meetings" in the space of one weekend!
The committee members are not nameless - I (for one) have a name! As
for non-public meetings, it's the nature of every organisation. I am
also the chairman of my resident's association, and there isn't a
major hue and cry when there are closed committee meetings. Each year
we have an AGM, the executive and committee are elected, and business
carries on quietly in the background until the next public meeting.
In the case of the RA, any resident can approach any member of the
committee with thoughts/suggestions, and I think this should be the
case with IUGI as well. But *please* bear in mind that this committee
is restricted firmly to the task of setting up the next meeting - end
of story.
>Oh for goodness sake, what do you want, a medal for turning up last
>saturday? Well done, how committed of you. Hurrah for Howard. It's
>this kind of attitude I'm against - where comments made by people like
>myself (such as my belief that more public meetings would be a good thing)
>are so derided:
>
>>unwilling to make a single constructive comment except except gripe and
>>snipe and grumble and whinge about those willing to take action without
>>waiting for another year to pass, then so be it also.
Hmm, yeah, as Niall said, Usenet brings out the worst in us. Howard
isn't nearly as abrasive in person! (are you, Howard?)
>If you can't understand that the work of the committee should proceed in
>tandem with public meetings (progress meetings where the committe could
>share their work to date), that doesn't mean that when someone suggests it
>that they are "griping, sniping, grumbling and whinging". Get a clue.
>(there's another cliche for you).
The most important thing right now is consensus and co-operation. The
meeting was productive and useful, despite (or because of) the
diversity of opinion. Let's keep channelling that diversity, and get
this job done.
_ \ | __| paulcunnane at hotmail
__/ _` | | | | ( | | \ \ _` | \ -_)
_| \__,_|\_,_|_| \___|\_,_|_| _|_| _|\__,_|_| _|\___|
Paul Cunnane
Garvey) wrote:
>co...@daemon-computing.demon.co.uk (Colin Polykett) writes:
>
>>On 5 Mar 1999 12:22:17 -0000, da...@maedhbh.maths.tcd.ie (Daire
>>Garvey) wrote:
>
>>I predict that by the next meeting you'll have split in the 'Internet
>>User Group of Ireland (IUGI)' and the 'Irish Internet Users Group
>>(IIUG)'. You'l then spend half of the next meeting standing on
>>opposite sides of the hall/pub/hotel shouting 'Splitter' at each
>>other.
>
>Yeah! What have the ISPs ever done for us?! :)
>
>D.
OK, OK, but apart from Mail, Web, Usenet, Telnet, FTP, Gopher and IRC,
*what* have they actually done for us?
:)
Paul Cunnane
Garvey) wrote:
> then I think it's a Good Thing(tm).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hey! Did you pay me any royalties before you used that?? :)
> I'll certainly wander
>along swap evil glances with that Howard bloke. :)
You'll love him when you get to know him, honest...
Howard Britain
> Right. Charters etc. will *absolutely NOT* be decided behind closed
> doors, but will be discussed publicly at the next open meeting. The
> committee of 8 (or however many of us there are, I can't remember) will
> be meeting to discuss the next meeting, that's a meeting that there
> really isn't any point in anyone else attending since the points
> discussed will be purely about the running of the next meeting. We will
> not be deciding on a charter or anything of the sort.
Exactly.
Howard
Howard Britain
> I'll certainly wander
> along swap evil glances with that Howard bloke. :)
I don't what about, Daire. I said exactly the same thing over and over.
But either way, thank goodness someone gets it and it seems to be
spreading :)
Maybe we can get on with things.
Howard
Robert Fahey
<da...@maedhbh.maths.tcd.ie> writes
>Don't be silly. I want an independant user group as much as you do - I
>just have a problem with one that goes from "idea" to "nameless
>committee members and non-public meetings" in the space of one weekend!
If that's the impression that has been given, it's a false one. Now, I
personally couldn't name all the committee members right now, I think
Niall has a list, and it'd pour some oil on troubled waters if it was
posted here, I feel.
Non-public meetings? Not at all. Committee meetings to arrange the next
public meeting, yes. But major issues of importance to the association
will not be discussed except openly, and in public. I don't think that
anyone on the interim committee wants that. I know that I certainly
don't.
Howard Britain
> Now, I
> personally couldn't name all the committee members right now, I think
> Niall has a list, and it'd pour some oil on troubled waters if it was
> posted here, I feel.
I am waiting for the list from Niall and will post it as soon as I get
it.