next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects Dear Leo, On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 ljdeveau@chebucto.ns.ca wrote: > Hi Chris (and others), > > Thank-you for your recent note [Sun, 23 Apr 2000 17:20:54 -0300 (ADT)] > concerning the new group and organization registration process we are > implementing at Chebucto. It's not really my desire to belabour these issues, however; a) It's a consequential issue; and b) There are a number of serious misconsceptions here that need to be addressed. > Contrary to eliminating the IP database we will be undertaking a major > overall redesign this Spring and Summer to have our community information > more easily accessible to members or general users coming to the Chebucto > homepage. In regard to what I am specifically addressing here -- the functionality and utility of the IP Database and the way in which this enfranchises our volunteer community -- I have yet to see any evidence of this. Moreover, its not generally the case that one demolishes something without good reason and without having something better in its place; and this is certainly not the case here. > Further, although it certainly has proven itself useful, the IP > registration process had clearly become cumbersome for a number of capable > organizations wanting faster web-hosting support. I neither accept nor believe this. The IP registration process, in general, was not cumbersome. I've dealt with every IP application on the CCN for a span of three + years. I've heard all the praise and all the criticism. A small proportion (I'd say 10%) of applicants balked at some aspect of it or had some difficulties with it: almost always due to their desire not to take IP Training. This was the only contentious area of the IP process (and only to a small proportion of applicants). The remainder of the process worked smoothly and efficiently and could turn over applications as fast as the people at the other end were prepared to move. Moreover,*none* of this has the slightest bearing on what was the point of my communication, namely the utility of the IP Database and Group Editor as the most progressive and empowering development in relation to IP in the history of the CCN. Those that did not work with it may be unfamiliar with its considerable utility, What should be done, however, is that every IP Application should be processed through it and it should be *improved* not scrapped or shunted aside. > And more importantly, we need to ensure the office has better accurate > records on what is being purchased by the IPs and for how long. In the > web-based world we're now in, all of this information was neither easily > accessible nor administratively convenient. Not true: it is easily accessible. Moreover when is administrative convienience the sole criterion of what should be done in a Community Net? > Thus, the reason to undertaking changes and improving upon what we've > been doing in the past. > > We will contiune to improve upon Chebucto's commitment to support local > groups and organizations through linked repositories of information, both > at Chebucto and soon to other relevant community-based groups in the HRM. > Over the next two months we will be contacting all our IPs to outline our > sustainable fee structure and to seek further input from them on ways that > we can improve our services to IPs. We've already had IPs approaching us > wishing to renew their fees under our new fee structure and we've also had > others asking us about providing e-commerce support. Laudible, however, none of this pertains to the case I am making. The IP Database is an assent towards these goals not a liability. > Although I appreciate your expressed cautions, nevertheless contrary to > your reservations I believe that these changes and improvements will > continue to grow our IP base and empower further our pool of CCN Editors to > be more proactive in their respective IP areas. If we do not have clear, > dynamic and accessible tools to support our IPs and the relevant community > information that they provide, we will simply become stagant and we will no > longer be able to attract the editorial or technical talent necessary to > continue our support. Not true.. In one fell swoop you disenfrancise the whole pool of CCN editors for the ability to find out any basic information about IPs or to play any meaningful role in the administration of IP sites. Its a foolish move that does not serve any useful goal except for 'administrative convienience.' I believe the CCN should reflect a broader set of values in relation to its decisions. > Further, accurate administrative records are critical to Chebucto's > financial sustainability. Fine: none of this is inconsistent with the functionality of the IP Database, in fact quite the opposite. The information there is the best centralized source of information on our IP pool and this information can be accessed by our volunteer pool, not just by administrative staff or technical people. It could certainly be improved. Ergo: work to improve it rather than demolish it. The recent set of IPs (Upstream Music Association, etc.) have been implemented in a technically foolish manner , running them through the CCN individual User system. The result is a regretable mess that CCN Editors have no ability to even access information (I'll let the technical committee speak to its own set of problems with this). > It is not the wish to eliminate the IPDB or the IP training process, but it > was nevertheless discussed that if we were to move forward in taking > advantage of opportunties (ie; VolNet groups, Small Business support, new > CAP site support, etc.) we needed to redesign our systems quickly. Who made these decisions? "It was discussed" - by whom? I was never part to such agreements nor were they ever on the agenda of meetings I attended. > New scripting requirements in the IPDB was going to take considerable > time and thus because time was indeed of the essence we had to move > forward with what I think is a much more efficient and cleaner approach. And I contend you are wrong. It is a shortsighted view that will not improve CCN IP service one whit -- quite the contrary. Expedience and administrative convenience are not the only values that a community net should be built around. Ther are other contentding values as well. > Contrary to being vacuous, I think this is an intelligent and informed > way to proceed. Otherwise, Chebucto Community Net will continue to > bleed away more IPs to other services and Chebucto will lose its > viablilty and attractiveness to the community-at-large. > > I don't wish to sound alarmist, but when I arrived on the scene at > Chebucto last June, this organization was hemorrhaging, losing far too > many members to other services and not communicating our mission very > well to the larger community. With the support of the Board and many > commtted volunteers, I think we've all begun to address these concerns > by focusing on mission critical details and we're now beginning to > stablize the patient :) But we've still got a ways to go to ensuring > Chebucto remains in good financial health and remains viable on long > term. Again, laudable points, but they miss the point of my critique: the IPDB had no detrimental effect on the financial health of the CCN. > I believe I've made every effort to have information and ideas exchanged > within the IP committee and with the Editors regarding all these efforts to > improve our support services to IPs. I would assume all the individuals in > these groups would do likewise with the respective IPs they've been > supporting. However, when I send out an invitation, as I did last week, to > have an IP committee and IPE meeting at 6:30pm next Tuesday (May 2nd) to > address our homepage redesign requirements, I received only one response. > This leads me to wonder what the commitment is to move these efforts ahead. > But in any case, the meeting will go forward, for these needs are pressing > and we shall all soldier on :) Speaking only for myself, I have grown rather weary of IP Committee meetings being called not by the IP Chair, being scheduled at the last moment, notification being sent (if at all) to the wrong groups (only hours beforehand), with an agenda not determined by the stakeholders and with decisions and procedures arising from such meeting that were not even discussed as part of those meetings. Further, commitment is expressed in other ways then just planting one's rear-end in a seat. ;-> We have a large pool of volunteers who work in many varied ways around goals they are committed to. One may not see them in person at a meeting but their contributions, online and elsewhere, are certainly seen and felt. Best wishes, Christopher Majka _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. Christopher Majka <aa051@chebucto.ns.ca> Editor: Culture & Philosophy - Chebucto Community Net, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. URL = http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/Culture.html "Culture is the sum of all the forms of art, of love and of thought, which, in the course of centuries, have enabled man to be less enslaved." -- Andre Malraux, 1957 _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects