Meetings' Structure

[Jared Smith]

Would all of the people who wish to have a KCLUG
with lots of structure, please start their own friendly user
group? I'm deeply happy with the current structureless
meetings, finding here something that I cannot find
anywhere else on the planet.

To me, structure sucks. KCLUG works like Linux: If you 
want something to happen, make it happen. Don't wait for
it to happen. However, the only thing that screws up
this amazingly open structure... is structure.

Start another group. There's room. I'd show up at the 
structured LUG occasionally, but only if there was 
something really interesting goin on.

I have been involved in several 501c3s, started one
myself even, and found no matter how hard y'try, 
that as soon as a telephone number is attached to the 
group, then comes a hierarchy, because someone has 
to manage the phone. Then comes a political power 
struggle which NEVER ENDS. It also begins to cost
money for no good reason. And people who simply 
want to learn have to jump through all kinds of 
administrative hoops to do so. I am adamantly,
firmly, unequivocally opposed to KCLUG having any
more structure than it does now. Ever. The trade show
was one of the funnest things I've done in years, and
it all came together quite naturally, without structure.

I mean no harm, but structure-dependent people do
have the option of starting up a whole new LUG which
works in cooperation with the current KCLUG.

In short, if you want to make KCLUG work top-down and
slowly and inefficiently and be unable to address individual 
concerns, add structure to it: Kansas City Structured 
Linux Users Group.

This would be called a fork, I believe. And I think you'd
find it easy to do, since it looks like you've got some
momentum for the idear. But remember, please, the
momentum was birthed within a structureless 
environment.

Thank you.

-Jared