DMS Committee Governance : moved discussion

[hon1nbo]

@kthompson395

Furthermore, filling out a short expense form is extremely easy and I can’t understand why that would make the difference between helping and not helping

Not everyone can spare the cash to be picking things up and waiting on reimbursements.

[kthompson395]

Is that case the exception or the rule? Because it seems that the assertion being made here is that chairs and volunteers in general don’t want to do it.

[lukeiamyourfather]

@IanLee

On the other hand, I’ve had to create consensus in large groups to get stuff done before, so I don’t find it particularly daunting per se, just status quo.

If you’re willing to do that then I’m thankful. I suspect there are other would be chairpersons, especially in other committee areas, that see that as more than they’re willing to sign up for.

@IanLee

I could buy a new hand plane for <$200 though, so is it really stopping that right now?

Saying you’re going to do it on Talk before you do it.

@IanLee

I don’t think you’re right (at first glance) that the change in chair election style has contributed to a popularity contest any more than the previous model.

You must’ve missed out on people gathering 100+ signatures via minions for proxy votes at the committee level. It was stupid and ineffective. Hopefully we don’t devolve to that again.

@IanLee

In short I think your argument holds some water but necessitates finding a middle ground between current policies and old.

I’ve seen the before and after and I can tell you which works best. If there’s a middle ground I think that’s cool too. Suggestions?

@IanLee

From my perspective, one of the largest issues preventing me from functioning as an autonomous chair is the lack of a budget. If I had a monthly/ quarterly budget, I could better function as a business unit and plan purchases. Right now, with no budget, the only real check on my spending power is the committee, so perhaps it’s a good thing until we can establish budgets again. If I had a budget, I would argue that the board should raise the spending limits drastically.

I haven’t kept up with things that much to know the current state of things. Committees used to have a monthly budget that was automatically allocated to cover the basics (replacing small broken stuff, replacing safety equipment, refilling some consumables but not all). The monthly budgets were in the hundreds of dollars for most committees and the low thousands for a few committees. When committees wanted to buy something big like a new table saw or laser or whatever they’d ask the board for funding directly.

@kthompson395

Furthermore, filling out a short expense form is extremely easy and I can’t understand why that would make the difference between helping and not helping. I definitely cannot sympathize with this attitude.

Cool, that’s why we can agree to disagree. I think enabling volunteers and making it easy for them to do something is a positive thing for DMS. You’re pretty much saying “deal with it” and I disagree with that attitude.

[hon1nbo]

@kthompson395

Is that case the exception or the rule? Because it seems that the assertion being made here is that chairs and volunteers in general don’t want to do it.

it’s pretty common. As volunteers we’re all from different backgrounds. Some of us make less than others, some may have a good job but still be paying things down. Others just may not want the hassle.

To say it’s the norm that people should expect to pay out of pocket and expect reimbursement I think is the wrong way to look at it. This isn’t a job. People are, literally, already paying to be here and are volunteering their time, and not everyone wants to throw more money into it and wait for it to come back to them.

[kthompson395]

If the amount of cash one has on hand is truly limited, even with respect to the small purchases described, then that is unfortunate and we should make things easier for these individuals. On this you, I, and Luke are in agreement.

It is true that volunteers are paying to be here, but it is important to note that only some of them are actually giving their time. The ones that are actually giving their time are perfectly fine. I too have been paying to be at DMS and ever since I joined, I’ve met a lot of good people from different backgrounds.

But I’ve just as often encountered excuse after excuse for inaction or absence. I’ve just often encountered people who seem more enamored with prestige, control, or conservation moreso than actual progress or results. If I seem impatient or cold, it is because I have grown tired of hearing excuses.

I thank the people who devote their time and resources to the space, but I see a lot of complainers who I know certainly are not short on cash that will not take destiny into their own hands.

[michaelb]

!remindme 6 months

Oh crap wrong website. Seems like you either quit while you’re still Kevin or stick around long enough to agree with Luke.

[Photomancer]

@lukeiamyourfather

I’ve taken new mandatory wood shop training at least twice

Only twice! Oh, you had good

[IanLee]

It’s totally fair to say that not every member has the skills right off the bat to lead an organization or gather consensus from a committee.

On the other hand, we as makers are inherently about learning new skills. Perhaps leading a committee in this way is a skill that we should require from our leaders, perhaps not.

I guess the question there comes down to what skills do we care that our leaders have? Does it matter if they can balance a budget? Gather consensus? Etc?

Benevolent dictator doesn’t require as many (or perhaps the same) skills, is that ok?

[IanLee]

@lukeiamyourfather

You must’ve missed out on people gathering 100+ signatures via minions for proxy votes at the committee level. It was stupid and ineffective. Hopefully we don’t devolve to that again.

Oof what crazy thing. I did miss out on this.

A example middle ground would be having budgets for committees to plan normal purchasing without votes (large tools excepted) and perhaps allowing chairs to implement new rules as they wish but the committee can call a vote to remove a rule at any time. Or perhaps all new rules have a 3 month trial period and after that they have to be approved by the committee.

[artg_dms]

@kthompson395

and you are volunteering for a year if you are a chair or vice-chair.

Committee Chairs are required to hold elections every 6 months.
BoD and Officers hold office for 1 year.
How members come to hold office is out there in the rules, bylaws, etc.

@IanLee

It’s totally fair to say that not every member has the skills right off the bat to lead an organization or gather consensus from a committee.

Being a Chair is an ongoing learning experience. Membership changes, committee changes, BoD changes, etc. - one learns to adapt. Benevolent dictator? Consensus? It’s a balance of both. At the end of the day somebody has to make a decision and just maybe not everybody is happy. Such is life.

The current set of rules, guidelines, etc. for how to run a committee work just fine. Not seeing a need for any major changes.

[kthompson395]

You still volunteer to be a chair or vice-chair because it is both voluntary and uncompensated. Elections do not change this. I may have gotten the term size of chair wrong, but your focus is better placed on the central idea that to volunteer is to assume responsibility. Patronization is less important.

[Raymond]

@kthompson395

I may have gotten the term size of chair wrong, but your focus is better placed on the central idea that to volunteer is to assume responsibility. Patronization is less important.

You need to do both. What good is a responsible person who isn’t there to take care of the committee area they are chair of?

[kthompson395]

I am not sure how your response relates to what I have said. I never said that it was possible to be a responsible person who is absent.

[artg_dms]

@kthompson395

but your focus is better placed on the central idea that to volunteer is to assume responsibility.

Having served DMS in various offices long term - my focus is just fine thank you. I’m sure somebody would let me know otherwise. How 'bout you? Served in any office??

@kthompson395

Patronization is less important.

Please do explain yourself.

Skip the psycho babble semantical wordsmithing.

[michaelb]

@artg_dms

Served in any office?

I do believe Kevin is the upcoming vice chair of science. Thus my young vs old comment. Do try not to kill his enthusiasm until at least the first week.

[lukeiamyourfather]

Your comment earlier made me laugh but I felt a little guilty about it. @artg_dms we should be welcoming of new folks. Gatekeeping won’t improve things for anyone.

[artg_dms]

@lukeiamyourfather

Gatekeeping won’t improve things for anyone.

No “gatekeeping” needed nor implied.
Have encouraged members to run for chair / v-chair.
Have worked with those new to the office.

[kthompson395]

Hmm… I can see how my words would lead you to believe that I was calling you lazy. Forgive me for this. I was more saying that the central idea of the statement was unrelated to the length of the chair term and that I would prefer a more productive contribution. The way you replied came off as patronizing and it was difficult to see it in any other manner.

I’m not sure what “psycho babble semantical wordsmithing” is.

The indirect manner in which I mentioned this was meant to be less rude than the direct alternative. I can see that this failed.

[lukeiamyourfather]

@IanLee

On the other hand, we as makers are inherently about learning new skills. Perhaps leading a committee in this way is a skill that we should require from our leaders, perhaps not.

I care about the functionality of the space more than I care about a member learning to be a leader. When DMS was smaller I thought the opposite. When it was less than 200 people and there were knock down drag out arguments about spending a few hundred dollars on something it was okay to learn as you go. Not much was at stake and mistakes were relatively affordable. More is at stake now and more people depend on the resources provided by committees. Some committee areas serve more members than DMS did in it’s entirety five years ago.

@IanLee

A example middle ground would be having budgets for committees to plan normal purchasing without votes (large tools excepted) and perhaps allowing chairs to implement new rules as they wish but the committee can call a vote to remove a rule at any time. Or perhaps all new rules have a 3 month trial period and after that they have to be approved by the committee.

I think it needs some work but I like where it’s headed compared to the current policies. This idea could have legs depending on who gets elected for the board.

@kthompson395

I thank the people who devote their time and resources to the space, but I see a lot of complainers who I know certainly are not short on cash that will not take destiny into their own hands.

This is more or less what I was getting at before. People don’t exist solely to serve DMS. They do it or don’t do it for various reasons and we have control over some of those reasons. I’m not saying we should cater to every random whim but there’s value in assessing the efficiency of our policies which translates into the effectiveness of our volunteers (and the willingness of people to volunteer).

[Adam_Oas]

@IanLee

Do you feel that it’s a bad thing to occasionally require re-training? Why or why not? What if that re-training was online and took a few minutes instead of fighting to get into the next class?

Is re-training good? Yes, absolutely.
Is invalidating my access to a major section of DMS until I can be re-re-re-trained bad? Yes.

The concept of even annual retraining that I can schedule at my convenience (online would be great!) is certainly OK by me, but my schedule these days simply doesn’t allow for booking classes as far in advance as I used to be able to and the odds of sliding into a class is low enough that It’s been over a year now since I’ve been able to work in the woodshop at DMS, and that frankly sucks.

I’d actually support an annual online test for most, if not all of the shops at DMS to maintain your access.