[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Executive Director

[jim]

   the concensus process has to do with meeting objections. 
the explicit objection seems to be that mitch (who is 
acceptable in general) is away  lot and may not be able to 
perform ED duties. 
   if i'm mistaken, please let me know. 

   responses to the objection have been 
* meetings are infrequent 
* meeting schdules are flexible 
* remote attendance (by phone or other) seems okay 
* the previous ED was away a lot and things seemed okay 
* membership seems generally to want minimum ED duties 
* ED should be able to articulate generally re NB (this 
  last was an additional suggested consideration) 

   i have not seen any responses from the objector to the 
above six points other than to the last one, to which 
there has been at least one re-response. 

   additional themes rising in the thread include 
discussion on consensus (which seems to be working), ED 
nomination process (which seems to be akimbo), agreement 
that we'll give it a week and hope for more candidates 
and try to consense on one of them a week after (which 
seems to be what's happening).... 
   there's been value in the discussion. the length is 
to be expected of a group that's new to this stuff (our 
first new ED, yes?). 
   seems that next time we should nominate a new ED before 
the old ED term expires. 
   but these ideas don't relate to the objection itself. 

   i'll try again: 
* if meetings are infrequent and flexibly scheduled, it 
seems that all concerned can schedule meetings around 
each other's personal schedules. yes? 
* if remote attendance is okay, then it seems travel 
should not matter if the traveler is able and willing 
to attend remotely. yes? 
* if the previous ED was away a lot and things seemed 
to work out okay, how does the current candidate's 
travel seem different? also, the objection in this 
respect seems one of conjecture/speculation unless 
there's some specific aspect of mitch's travel. yes? 
* if membership wants minimal ED duties, then the only 
issue seems to be the ability to attend meetings and 
direct the output of the annual report. yes? 
* although not mentioned in the meeting, if the ED is 
expected to articulate NB activities, what standards 
do we expect of the ED? is there a reasonable expectation 
beyond that of general knowledge of NB history and the 
ability to learn about specific projects if necessary? 
what say? 




On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 01:50 -0800, Sai Emrys wrote:
> Attempting to rephrase Christie, to demonstrate a bit of empathy
> rather than just arguing:
> 
> The majority of people are satisficing* here. Mitch is good, therefore
> they think it's not worth bothering to look elsewhere.
> 
> Christie is primarily wanting either of two things AFAICT:
> a) to optimize the choice of ED by comparing more candidates and
> picking the best overall
> b) to prevent groupthink behavior, a priori
> 
> People are responding by trying to counter her objections to Mitch,
> and ignoring those desiderata. What she wants is to have a real
> discussion about other options.
> 
> I think neither of these goals is harmful to NB to do, and they should
> be at least mildly beneficial, so why not humor her? Enough about
> Mitch, everyone knows who he is etc. That ain't going anywhere for a
> week.
> 
> Please talk about other people, like Mikolaj, who's accepted zir
> nomination and might well make a great ED too. Mikloaj is local
> (IIRC), shows up a lot, and appears not to be a serial killer or
> anything like that. ;-)
> 
> Bashing heads is IME less productive than actually displaying some
> empathy and negotiating...**
> 
> - Sai
> 
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satisficing - cogsci stuff. tl;dr:
> going for "good enough" rather than "best"
> ** Am I the only one who has to keep fighting a reflex to point at how
> this is yet another case of framing conflicts?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_%28social_sciences%29
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>