LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  October 2017

CODE4LIB October 2017

Subject:

Re: Fiscal continuity vote now open

From:

Corey Halpin <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 26 Oct 2017 10:43:11 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (172 lines)

In case it is of use, here's a perspective from someone who lurks,
cares, and is currently considering attending the 2018 conference --

I'm "here" because I'm a software engineer who works primarily on a
digital repository system. I'm on the list to learn about trends in
the digital library space and practices/protocols/tools/etc that I can
bring to my work to make the software I work on a better citizen of
the library software ecosystem.

As such, I see myself more as a guest in the C4L community than as a
member of it. I'm a somewhat more active member in a few free software
communities. From those experiences, I have Many Feelings about
community structure, governance, fiscal sponsorship, etc.

But because I feel like a guest in this community, I've abstained from
voting in the poll. I made that decision after reading and weighing
the options presented and considered them in the light of my own
experience in other communities. I did not feel comfortable adding my
opinion to the scales in *this* community.

I would also not be comfortable with it if my decision to abstain from
voting were interpreted as an implicit vote for any of the
options, as a quorum requirement could do.


Hopefully the above is helpful.

~crh

On 2017-10-24, Shearer, Timothy wrote:
> A potential issue with that first method is that I think a lot of folks lurk, care, and maybe even attend the conference...but for a variety of reasons may not post to the list.
>
> Early in my code4lib days I was intimidated by what I perceived to be the level of experience and expertise from the more vocal/visible members of the community and doubted the potential worth of adding my voice. There can be lots of reasons for radio silence including impostor's syndrome, actual job function (as compared to idealized job fit), current ability to engage (life and work get in the way), etc. And so I'm not sure that contributing to the list is an ideal proxy for "active" for this community.
>
> Having said this, I'm not coming up with any great alternatives.
>
> If this particular attempt doesn't seem to end in a clear answer, I'd be comfortable with that subset of the community that happens to attend the conference in 2018 making the decision as a collective. I think it would end up being representative enough. And there'd be the potential for nearly full engagement (for the attendees) with the voting process if it were a part of the actual event.
>
> I really appreciated the reminder, though, as I'd meant to vote but it had fallen off my radar.
>
> As a past conference organizer, I'd recommend giving extra emphasis in your individual deliberations to the voices of those who have struggled with the realities of being "a community" with no formal mechanism for dealing with the funds issue.
>
> Others have done so, but I'd like to pile on with my thanks to those who have been doing the heavy lifting on identifying the alternatives, investigating them, and creating this tool. It's a lot of work, but it's important work. Thank you!
>
> Tim
> [now wearing his imaginary, virtual "I voted" sticker]
>
>
>
>
> On 10/24/17, 5:01 PM, "Code for Libraries on behalf of Butler, Paul Raymond" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> One method would be to count all unique emails that posted to the listserv in say the last 3 years as a baseline for "Active membership" and require say 51% of that number to be consider a quorum for this vote. Another baseline would be the average conference attendance over a period of time. So many ways to slice and dice this, if it wasn't established prior to the vote.
>
> Cheers, Paul
> -------------------------------------------------
> Paul R Butler, mlis
> Library Technologies Support Analyst
> Library Information Technology Services (L.I.T.S)
> Ball State University
> Muncie, IN 47306
> P: 765.285.8032
> E: [log in to unmask]
>
> The University Libraries provide services that support student pursuits for academic success and faculty endeavors for knowledge creation and classroom instruction.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Coral Sheldon-Hess
> Sent: October 24, 2017 4:25 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal continuity vote now open [radical idea]
>
> That isn't a dumb question, Jason; no, we have not set up a minimum percentage of voters, in part because “membership” in Code4Lib is such an amorphous thing. We definitely do not have 3500 active members, no matter what our listserv subscription looks like. But we do get close to 500 attendees at conferences, not all of whom are the same from year to year, so I will be disappointed in us if we don’t get at LEAST that many votes.
>
> Speaking purely practically, I hope that we will see enough votes come in that nobody tries to argue for invalidating the election results because of it. I will be furious if all of this work was for naught.
>
> Please vote.
>
> Best,
> Coral
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Jason Bengtson <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > I apologize if this is a dumb question, or something I've just missed
> > or forgotten, but is there a minimum percentage vote tally required to
> > certify a result?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > *Jason Bengtson*
> >
> >
> > *https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.j
> > asonbengtson.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cprbutler%40BSU.EDU%7C13ba8a3039f84d
> > 676f8508d51b1d66fe%7C6fff909f07dc40da9e30fd7549c0f494%7C0%7C0%7C636444
> > 735451074274&sdata=HrecQio34Qyx7D3SAMf7BQriz%2BAOudSoKvoE8qPISaw%3D&re
> > served=0
> > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.j
> > asonbengtson.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cprbutler%40BSU.EDU%7C13ba8a3039f84d
> > 676f8508d51b1d66fe%7C6fff909f07dc40da9e30fd7549c0f494%7C0%7C0%7C636444
> > 735451074274&sdata=HrecQio34Qyx7D3SAMf7BQriz%2BAOudSoKvoE8qPISaw%3D&re
> > served=0>*
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Kyle Banerjee
> > <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I would be leery of interpreting abstention in that way. Similar
> > > logic
> > has
> > > been employed in some states to prevent referendums involving tax
> > increases
> > > to be passed.
> > >
> > > My sense is that the low vote total reflects that people understand
> > > this
> > is
> > > a serious issue requiring an informed decision. Those who don't have
> > > the time or background to fully digest what each option means might
> > > well hang back rather than unintentionally indicate a preference
> > > that could lead to serious problems.
> > >
> > > In any case, people who feel the current system is fine and don't
> > > want to pursue alternatives can affirmatively choose that we keep
> > > things as they are.
> > >
> > > kyle
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Oct 24, 2017, at 3:02 PM, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >> Just bumping this, to remind people to vote. We have 129 votes
> > > > >> cast,
> > > so
> > > > >> far, and I suspect more people are interested in the outcome of
> > > > >> this
> > > > than
> > > > >> have voted, yet.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%
> > > > >> 2Fwww.surveymonkey.com%2Fr%2FK5MWGNC&data=02%7C01%7Cprbutler%40
> > > > >> BSU.EDU%7C13ba8a3039f84d676f8508d51b1d66fe%7C6fff909f07dc40da9e
> > > > >> 30fd7549c0f494%7C0%7C0%7C636444735451074274&sdata=qbOGUsFut9JQm
> > > > >> U%2BctFpDNqPqBpnParSt93vvGE12C4M%3D&reserved=0
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, please vote. Otherwise, I don’t think we — the community --
> > > > > will
> > > > get enough input to make a sound decision.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Here’s a radical idea. There are essentially three choice in the vote:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Do nothing
> > > > 2. Incorporate
> > > > 3. Partner with fiscal agent
> > > >
> > > > There are approximately 3,500 people in our community. Each
> > > > non-vote
> > > could
> > > > be counted as a vote for #1. If so, then we are well on track for
> > > > doing nothing. 8-D —Earache
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager