Hello everyone. Well, I must say that I'm in rather a bad frame of mind right now. Between news that the CC are putting up further strange obstacles to JK's work ('adequate virus protection'? Sheesh) on the techie side of things, and all this bad blood on the personal side, it's hard to stay enthusiastic about MiNDS. No point in my moping, however - back to business! First of all, I'd like to address the tone of this list of late. People have been arguing heatedly with very little reason. We all care about MiNDS, we all are doing our best to make sure that we can make it a viable society once again, and unfortunately people are getting very emotional. We've got to remember that we're working towards the same goal. Please try to be a little calmer when reading mails on the list. If something really annoys you, try to remember not to respond immediately. And when you do respond, try to be businesslike about it. It's easy to ignore things that bother you. While we do all have personalities, perhaps cut down on comments that you personally think are funny. The text medium makes it very easy to misinterpret humour. Secondly, the issue of who goes to the meeting. It's obvious that the chair should go. I think it's fair to say that the VC should go too; it's very apparent that Siobhan does want to be there, and there is little to choose between our VC and our PRO going. The Computer Centre are unlikely to even bat an eyelid at our choice, so it really isn't as big a deal as we're all making out. People also seem to be of the opinion that I should go. While I do want to be there, keep in mind that I'm not even on the committee, nor was I a student this year. Thirdly, I have some questions which I think we've all forgotten about. What is the agenda at this meeting? Are we instigating it? Have we let the CC know what we want to talk about? When is it going to be? What should we bring/not bring to the table? Is anything actually up for discussion here, or are we going to sit opposite them and try to think of what to say? What happened to the documents we put together earlier in the year? It might be worth forwarding my policy documents to JK - he might be able to use some of the work I did on those. So. Let's try to keep our goal in sight: MiNDS, up and running as an entity approved by the college, in whatever form that eventually is. It may take a long time and many administrations before we have what we would term a reasonable level of access, but we've got to work with what we have. Some is better than none. And while we may not all be friends, let's try to keep this professional. Cian -- "There's one thing that computing teaches you, and that's that there's no point to remembering *everything*. Being able to *find* things is what's important." - Dan, Microserfs
From: "Cian" <pooka@redbrick.dcu.ie> To: <minds-disaster@redbrick.dcu.ie> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 12:57 AM Subject: [Minds-disaster] Opinions
Well, I must say that I'm in rather a bad frame of mind right now. Between news that the CC are putting up further strange obstacles to JK's work ('adequate virus protection'? Sheesh) on the techie side of things, and all this bad blood on the personal side, it's hard to stay enthusiastic about MiNDS. Apparently he's found a free one which the CC are happy with... more on this later (I'll need to dig up some information).
and there is little to choose between our VC and our PRO going. I've never made this point... that an attendance slot was between VC and PRO. I've *always* said that the meeting requires another person who can argue a point effectively... the position has so far only been between Kevin, Des and Bart. When discussing this meeting here, I have *always* said that Siobhan should go (the nearest I've come to saying she shouldn't is that "I'd like [to have other] reasons" for her to go, other than her position as VC; which she provided)
The Computer Centre are unlikely to even bat an eyelid at our choice, so it really isn't as big a deal as we're all making out. I've always said the CC would be put on the defensive with six people attending, not with our choice of four. However, I believe that the choice of attendees is VERY important, for these will be the people, at a VERY important meeting, putting across our position.
People also seem to be of the opinion that I should go. While I do want to be there, keep in mind that I'm not even on the committee, nor was I a student this year. Noted. However, you are far more technically competent than anyone else confirmed going... so if technical questions do arise, they'll all be fielded at (or redirected to) you.
Thirdly, I have some questions which I think we've all forgotten about. What is the agenda at this meeting? Are we instigating it? The agenda of this meeting is, as it has always been, "The clarification of Minds on the college network". We *have* instigated it, or at least begun the process of it (I'm still a bit grogy, I've not been up long, so don't get me on symantics :) ). A while back I was told by Albrecht Eberhard that three people would be attending from their side; himself, John O'Connell, and some other person (can't remember at the moment, but I'll dig it out). He suggested the week of the 23rd of July, but he hasn't given us any more information (despite me emailing him about three weeks ago). I'll email him again.
What should we bring/not bring to the table? Is anything actually up for discussion here, or are we going to sit opposite them and try to think of what to say? Yes. It is all up for discussion, and I'd like everyone to do so.
Personally, I'll be "selling" them the Nervecenter project as part of a greater argument; that we are a benefit to the college, not just to our members but the entire student body. Someone else should probably emphasise the importance of the communal machine (I think that should be you Cian, with all your Brickie experience and all :) ). We will all also have to counter any arguments they have against us. These will probably be issues of trust, but to *gain* their trust we must impress them with our greatness. Basically, "we're great".
What happened to the documents we put together earlier in the year? They're in the Minds account on RB, on a computer at home (I think) and on Minds itself.
It might be worth forwarding my policy documents to JK - he might be able to use some of the work I did on those. Although I think it's a good idea to send them to JK (good idea), what could he use them for? I'm not clear on this.
So. Let's try to keep our goal in sight: MiNDS, up and running as an entity approved by the college, in whatever form that eventually is. We also want to get some sort of communal machine up and running by Fair's Day. Free CD's only do so much, and I doubt the new machine will be up, running and fully configured by then (so we may need to go without certain services for a while, but the most important are "hey" and the newsgroups).
It may take a long time and many administrations before we have what we would term a reasonable level of access, but we've got to work with what we have. Some is better than none. Have you read the emails on the list with regards to the access level to the new machine? We've pretty much got everything back, except insecure access from inside the college (so no telnet or FTP, but we can SSH and SFTP; limited to CS subnets though).
And while we may not all be friends, let's try to keep this professional. I would have thought that we're all friends... I'd say that's where some of the problems lie. We're less afraid to say what we feel like on the list.
BTW, is Commie Dave still on the list? David Barrett
[ David Barrett ]
Apparently he's found a free one which the CC are happy with... more on this later (I'll need to dig up some information).
That'll be AMaViS (www.amavis.org), I imagine. It's supposed to be quite good.
I've always said the CC would be put on the defensive with six people attending, not with our choice of four. However, I believe that the choice of attendees is VERY important, for these will be the people, at a VERY important meeting, putting across our position.
It is important. Of course it it. But between the people we're talking about, there is not much to choose. So let who wants to go, go. It would be best to keep the number to three, I think. So let's get this out of the way - I would suggest the Chair, the Vice-Chair, and the ex-Sysadm. Objections?
Noted. However, you are far more technically competent than anyone else confirmed going... so if technical questions do arise, they'll all be fielded at (or redirected to) you.
Fair enough.
We will all also have to counter any arguments they have against us. These will probably be issues of trust, but to *gain* their trust we must impress them with our greatness.
We're not really that great. We've been nothing but trouble, from their point of view. Our view of the society is wildly different from theirs. Man, I wish that mailbombing thing hadn't happened.
It might be worth forwarding my policy documents to JK - he might be able to use some of the work I did on those. Although I think it's a good idea to send them to JK (good idea), what could he use them for? I'm not clear on this.
I'm referring to the network policy document, mainly. It might be useful in planning the firewall.
So. Let's try to keep our goal in sight: MiNDS, up and running as an entity approved by the college, in whatever form that eventually is. We also want to get some sort of communal machine up and running by Fair's Day.
It would be nice, but with all of the hassle with the new registrants coming in real soon, I'd be surprised if the authorities involved will have time for us. I guess we'll just have to chase things up. Do drop the CC a mail - the next month is going to be a very busy period for them, so we should try to get together with them early.
Have you read the emails on the list with regards to the access level to the new machine? We've pretty much got everything back, except insecure access from inside the college (so no telnet or FTP, but we can SSH and SFTP; limited to CS subnets though).
I consider that pretty crippling. Especially since I'm a Maths student. ;o) But like I said, we'll work with what we've got.
And while we may not all be friends, let's try to keep this professional. I would have thought that we're all friends... I'd say that's where some of the problems lie. We're less afraid to say what we feel like on the list.
Perhaps. In that case, perhaps I should suggest that people forget we are friends, for the purposes of keeping the list in moderate tone. ;o)
BTW, is Commie Dave still on the list?
I unsusbscribed him last night, while making sure that the list archives were private. I was also horrified to find that the su president & webmaster have been bombarded with all the recent mails. Sorry about that, if you're even reading these mails anymore. Someone should probably ask to see if we should unsubscribe those two. Our current mail traffic probably isn't very relevant to them anymore. Cian -- "There's one thing that computing teaches you, and that's that there's no point to remembering *everything*. Being able to *find* things is what's important." - Dan, Microserfs
I like the way I have been voted off the meeting attendees guest list, but hey I'm not too worried. As long as my place is being given to cian, its ok. Cian, you should come into maynooth, and we can have a chat about the whole thing. As for the meeting, well if the same mentality, and rebuttal style is used there, as is used on this list god help us. Some severe relaxing should be done between now and then. A real time talk is needed, if not face to face, well at least some form of internet chat. IRC would be good, we can just make a minds channel on irc.phishy.net Or any kind of internet chat, I'm not too pushed.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Brennan" <newfoundwealth@hotmail.com> To: <minds-disaster@redbrick.dcu.ie> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 1:46 AM Subject: Re: [Minds-disaster] Opinions
I like the way I have been voted off the meeting attendees guest list, but hey I'm not too worried. As long as my place is being given to cian, its ok. Cian, you should come into maynooth, and we can have a chat about the whole thing.
Just to clarify, the whole thing being the last few months, not this meeting lark. As for the meeting, well if the same mentality, and rebuttal style is
used there, as is used on this list god help us. Some severe relaxing should be done between now and then. A real time talk is needed, if not face to face, well at least some form of internet chat. IRC would be good, we can just make a minds channel on irc.phishy.net Or any kind of internet chat, I'm not too pushed.
_______________________________________________ Minds-disaster mailing list Minds-disaster@lists.Redbrick.dcu.ie http://lists.Redbrick.dcu.ie/mailman/listinfo/minds-disaster
participants (3)
-
Cian -
David Barrett -
Philip Brennan