Re: Directions for the Programmers' Society - Part I

Dennis Clark ((no email))
Thu, 11 May 1995 17:45:23 +1000 (EST)

In previous mail, Ryan Shelswell wrote:
>
>
> Just what first picked my eye though:
>
> > members or so turning up. It was the kind of ppl-talking-over-each-other
> > that you have to expect at these sorts of things, and it was up to me to
> > force the group to come to a final decision and move on to the next
> > point. In the end tho I thought we did pretty well. All constitutional
> > changes were passed, and the JLP was disbanded (mainly because none of its
> > supporters were there to give a balanced argument).
>
> Some days I vote myself superman, but it doesn't make it so.

Ditto :)

>
> It seems pretty ridiculous to me, that there is a portion of ProgSoccers
> who are interested in 'pushing their own ideas', whether or not they are
> actually well-formed or have a rational basis. This is fed by the 'power
> monger' section who spread misinformation because they need to spread
> something...

I am hoping that by having fresh faces on the ProgSoc Executive this
year (everyone except Andrew is new, and he was only an acting treasurer
last year) would help avoid this kind of misinformation or
misrepresentation unduly influencing Executive decisions. How naive
this belief really is remains to be seen.

>
> We've had the "Is the JLP a good idea" discussion many, many times. It
> was originally suggested by Chris, or at least very quickly taken up by
> him, as President. It had wide support. In every meeting I have attended,
> I, and others, have convinced the attendees it should and can happen. Of
> course, the useful elements of ProgSoc will always obtrude these efforts.

Well it obviously didn't have wide support at the Special General
Meeting now did it? I would say tho that the main reason for that was
the fact that those in attendace (including myself) didn't really
understand all the mumbo-jumbo about it, not to mention being fed up
with all the bickering about it that's been involved.

I think we should give the JLP concept a bit of a rest so we can take a
more objective view when we re-consider it. It'd also help to have the
Executive tackle the sorts of problems the JLP was designed to handle
for a while, so we can compare the two and choose the "lesser evil".

>
> I'm going to make a magical prediction: the ProgSoc you're talking about
> won't happen, if we can't even sort out something as simple as this
> properly.

I agree in that if we can't tackle existing problem, we can't expect
ourselves be able to tackle new ones.

>
> PS. Constitutions were designed to help the running of a society. If you're
> finding them unhelpful, something is wrong.

It wasn't the Constitution I found unhelpful, it was the membership who
knew what I was doing wrong and didn't bother pointing it out to me (let
alone offer solutions).

--
Dennis Clark                             President, Programmers' Society
dbugger@nospam.ftoomsh.socs.uts.edu.au         University of Technology, Sydney
                "Clear code is a product of clear thought."