<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Adam Chlipala wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4A132A7B.10807@hcoop.net" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Michael Potter wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I'm a little suspicious that you're pushing this as an alternative way
to bring on paid staff by at least partially outsourcing them as the
staff of a VPS provider.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I'm disappointed that you're accusing me of this. Do you have any
evidence that _anyone_ involved in this discussion is pushing a secret
agenda? Simple disagreement is no such evidence. For someone who
brings up cooperative principles so much, you seem pretty ready to
ignore the basic standard of civility that makes consensus
decision-making possible.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
It's not exactly a secret, from the thread above:<br>
<br>
<quote><br>
<pre wrap="">Shaun Empie wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>The only reason I was saying it wasn't a great idea is that it will cost
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>more in the long run. The setup we have now has fixed recurring monthly
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>costs and fixed hw upgrade costs to expand. A VPS has recurring monthly
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>costs that go up once we start to expand.
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->Adam Chlipala wrote:
Right, but a lot of those costs cover staff who keep the hardware in
order, replacements for broken machines, etc..</pre>
</quote><br>
<br>
I think you're confusing directness with incivility. Also, there is no
consensus at Hcoop, the board is in control and this list is a
courtesy, as you underscore at the end of the message below. <br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4A132A7B.10807@hcoop.net" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Also, I don't think you ever responded to any of the questions about why
you think paying people to provide services to HCoop is a bad thing.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
It's not the paying so much as the new class of people who are
subservient to the board. To pay people enough would cost a lot, and
I'm not in favor of exploiting people by paying them too little. Also,
having employees is a whole new layer of complexity and could open the
co-op to liability. <br>
<br>
For what it's worth, my opinion is that VPSes might be worth it if the
costs will not go up too much, and I'd really only support getting the
service from another co-op like the Tech Co-op we already run the
outpost system from, or Cernio if they have the capacity these days. <br>
<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4A132A7B.10807@hcoop.net" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">There is also the philosophical angle to consider, whether a co-op
should move down one tier closer to retail and feed the for-profit
world. From running all VPSes, it's only one more step to mass
purchasing a web hosting package from a commercial provider with a group
discount, and so outsourcing tech support and software configuration. It
would be more in keeping with the cooperative approach to move UP a
level and provide its own rackspace. This is not exactly trivial though.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
That's certainly true. I wrote it before, but it's worth repeating, for
anyone interested in my personal position: I weight quality of service
far ahead of our degree of support for particular kinds of businesses.
In fact, I consider small businesses like Linode to be no worse off,
philosophically, than co-ops, and I consider for-profit businesses to
have significantly higher expected quality of service. I think HCoop
should exist because it isn't very profitable to provide the kinds of
neat niche stuff that our members want.
The degree to which particular ideologies influence co-op
decision-making will be decided by board votes. From discussion on this
list, I get the impression that only a minority of members have any
particular preference for supporting other co-ops and other
"less-businessy-than-usual" organizations, so I expect that we will end
up favoring that position in decision-making. It might be useful to
take some kind of official poll, though.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>