Fundamental questions and premises about DMS

DMS General
#1

The post about upgrading the laser computer caused me to ask, is that a laser committee issue or an infrastructure issue? And then that caused me to ask how many other core ideas are floating around out there that still aren’t nailed down.

Governing an organization as large as this one isn’t easy. Add that it’s all volunteer. Add that it’s open 24/7/365. Add that committee chairs can change every six months and the board every year.

Maybe it’s time to figure out the fundamental questions and premises about DMS at this point in its growth. I think it could make the next couple of years easier to have core ideas in one place instead of popping up here and there.

I wasn’t thinking about debating the questions in this thread. Each one deserves its own post. I’m wondering if we can come to a consensus about what the questions even are!

Here’s what’s come to my mind:

  1. If a computer is used in a committee, is it the committee’s responsibility to procure it and maintain it like any other tool, or is it better to use a common protocol and let a different committee, say infrastructure, pick it up. Or is there a need for a computer committee?

  2. Should DMS be looking into restructuring the board and elections for smoother leadership transitions?

  3. Should DMS remain all volunteer, or is there room to start hiring for more than housekeeping and bookkeeping?

  4. Your turn.

====

I also think a set of known starting points is a good idea. For instance:

  1. This location, this square footage, until September 2019. (That was a guess. Someone with exact dates can change the detail.)

I add that because I’ve watched decisions delayed citing the unknowns - but now it’s known.

  1. Your turn.

====

While the board is elected to make a number of decisions, I think the board also wants input. I remember the request made a few months ago to get quotes for electricity rates. I haven’t heard how that all turned out, but it sure generated some meaningful input.

====

Does anyone else think a little bit of thinking about the future makes sense? Maybe after generating the questions, we can prioritize them. Group strategic planning. Do let me know if you’ve covered this idea with this approach in one of the restricted Talk categories. And if you have, maybe let the rest of us in on the outcome?

#2

Governance of the PC will generally fall to infra because they handle all things that deal with licencing (i.e. software and operating system).

#3

For me the fundamental guiding principle of the DMS is:

Learn by doing.

Learning how to manage a large herd of cats members is fully legitimate and good use of the Dallas Makerspace. To that end creating formal structures is a double edged sword. Formal structures enable smoother “daily” operations but they entrench good and bad policies and prevent change, as well preventing a Maker from figuring it out themselves.

The way the DMS has handled jurisdictional issues in the past boiled down to Doacracy. Under Doacracy whoever cares enough to actually do something has their way. Ultimately I still think Doacracy is best test available for us to engage in decision making. If some one really cares they will do it, whatever it is, we just need to get out of the way. If you believe a different solution is better. let the other person try their solution, when it fails you fix it. The fundamental superpower of Doacracy is: Consensus is not necessary for action.

I am personally extremely against any member facing employees. Mostly because they undermine Doacracy but also because employees create a very different power structure than what we currently have. Outside of spending and banning members and chair person selection the Board is extremely limited in their power to effect change. In order to effect change the Board must voluntarily member buy in, this is not true for employees. Having an employee would also have “not my problem” effect on the membership, the opposite attitude I think we want to encourage.

To fully answer your question all* DMS problems can be solved by a liberal application of Doacracy and getting out of the way. When this idea is applied to the laser computer, who actually wants the new computer? Do they care enough to actually make it happen? Has it actually happened? Until it happens who cares?

edit: notice that “who” shows up in those question quite often everything in the world is done by people, individuals, organizations only server to help people work more efficiently. without an (singular) individual taking action question of organization are irrelevant

https://communitywiki.org/wiki/DoOcracy

*book keeping and disciplinary actions are obvious exceptions.

4 Likes
#4

Infrastructure handles computers. Both licensing and maintenance.

Committees make requests for their computer configuration. Infrastructure does not decide, in a vacuum, what a computer configuration will be.

On the well flogged Laser computer. If there were an upgrade, the Laser Committee would request the change and Infrastructure would implement.

It works pretty well, IMO.

@StanSimmons does a great job.

4 Likes
#5

Cool. I think I was confused by a couple of upgrades that I knew of that didn’t go though infrastructure, but they weren’t licensing issues.

Is it fair to say that computers are one area where do-ocracy steps aside, and protocol steps in? Are there others? I’m constantly told to do it myself if I don’t like something, followed very quickly by “you can’t do that.” Gets confusing.

#6

Sometimes members just do things that are needed… like upgrading memory in a computer in CA. :slight_smile:

BUT those types of things should always be run by the chair for that committee.

1 Like
#7

So computers are the committee’s responsibility.

#8

What committee?

Laser has an incentive to make people not design using a control computer. It it takes not upgrading the video card, then they should be allowed that.

3 Likes
#9

For daily care and feeding, Yes. The committee makes sure it is used correctly and that no one is abusing it, or loading things (porn, games) that shouldn’t be on it. Simple maintenance like swapping out a bad cord does not need infrastructure to get involved. A knowledgeable member can do that sort of thing.
Loading and maintenance of software and the OS and all things network should be left to our professionals.

1 Like
#10

Are you purposefully trying to be obstinate?

Infrastructure is in charge of them. Committees request upgrades as needed. In the case I was mentioning, I had spare memory and was happy to donate it.

You need something to do?

6 Likes
#11

This thread came out of that one: New specs for laser computers (upgraded and resolved)

#13

No, I’m referring to something from last year where I donated memory to upgrade a CA system.

#14

Cindy,

  1. Infrastructure owns the computers. We upgrade them when committee chairs request upgrades and the BoD allocates funds to do so, or the committee chair allocates funds from their account. Some of the computers, especially those that are dedicated to specific machinery, may have more direct control by the committee.

  2. Restructuring… No. Smoother transitions… absolutely. A document for each Chair on daily/weekly/monthly duties would help tremendously.

  3. Possibly.

  4. How about not worrying about who owns the computers while you are not a member? I’ve said this to others that were butting in while not having any skin in the game… If you are not a member, you have no voice in how DMS does anything.

10 Likes
#15

Actually, I was looking for more questions than to debate these.

I’d love to see DMS grow with its membership. Guess it’s just not that interesting to everyone.

I’ve been told to go away. I’ll go away.

#16

We ran off Brandon precisely because he embodied this mindset. Turns out that when you make zero effort to build consensus you piss people off. Especially when your do-ocracy gores their ox.

There’s a balance to be struck, and with more than 1500 members it’s somewhere between the extremes of free-wheeling do-ocracy and crushing bureaucracy.

11 Likes
#18

We are space-bound. It makes no sense to continue to grow membership until we have more space.

7 Likes
#19

can we pay to move one of our neighbors and take one of the sides?

1 Like
#20

Nope. It’s more about realizing it’s just not worth the effort.

What I don’t think DMS realizes is that when the fundamentals-yes even something as mundane as who is the constant contact for computers-is ignored, then it’s really tough to get the big stuff done.

I always thought I saw the potential for big stuff, but I guess the core/active membership is ok with still treating the organization like there are only 300 members.

DMS is interesting to me, but really not necessary. I’m glad Stan ran me off before I started paying dues again. It’s kind of like paying to relive the very worst parts of junior high school. I’m ok with skipping the sequel.

Every one look around. Is the place really functioning as well as it could? As it should? Did you have an idea that was shot down by insiders in the last month? Did you receive the “volunteer organization” excuse/lecture lately in response to a frustration you voiced?

DMS has a budget of over half a million dollars a year, but committees buy equipment they don’t get around to putting on the tool list. Are you ok with that?

I’m not. I thought I’d try to change that mindset. I failed.

This rant of mine will be flagged and hidden. It might even be deleted. I don’t care. If DMS were publicly traded stock, I’d short it. Management-the old timers-are stuck in a mindset that will eventually wreck the goodwill of your company. You’ve capitalized on the maker trend and survived your constant churn, but just like the craft beer phenomenon, I suspect you are about to have some competition. The new group might not be as cool as you, but they’ll be in a better location, or set up a leaner organization that sticks to a better business plan, and then you’ll look around at the end of two years and realize not only do you not need to move, but because DMS never asked itself hard questions, you can’t afford it.

You prove me wrong. If I hear about you someday in more than a puff PR piece, I’ll be genuinely happy for you. But right now a group of makers can’t even get a guy who uses a wheelchair into the building comfortably, and they just kicked to the curb a talented, intelligent woman who knows when to cut her losses.

It will hurt for a few days. I’ll get over it.

#21

Does the landlord even want us anymore?

2 Likes
#23

About?

  1. TheLab.ms https://www.thelab.ms/

They cannot seem to achieve critical mass. They have two classrooms and a combination electronics/break/meeting/server/laser cutter room.

Unless the laser cutter brings in lots of paying members, I do not see them getting a workshop. They have had one “training the trainers” class on the laser, but no other public indication that tool even exists.

  1. Rockwall Makerspace http://www.rockwallmakerspace.com/

Their web site says nothing. Their forum is only accessible to members. There is no way to decide that this organization is worth a look unless i lived really close.