[HCoop-Discuss] My hats

[Ryan Mikulovsky]

Hello all,

> I don't think there are more than 5 people who really want to get rid
> of Nathan, considering the total number of members I'd say calling
> that "widely-held" is a stretch. I waited through the delays along
> with everyone else but I don't want to railroad anyone. I find the odd
> insistence by a few that he is somehow not acceptable any more
> baffling.
>
I do not want him to go.  I think it is unreasonable that he be let go,
for the following reasons.

I believe that because ntk was in a super visible position, it's easy to
place blame on him.  I admit that I had some frustrations, which I think
is normal given the circumstances, but when you get down to it, it is not
fair to make him the scapegoat for problems that occurred without *any*
volunteer or boardmember's intervention.  He volunteered himself into a
situation that  quickly became overwhelming for all involved.  I can't
speak for ntk, but I bet he was affected the most!  It's easy to sit in
front of a computer thousands of miles away to take care of system tasks,
but not so much to arrange travel to Peer1, have time to actually stay to
get things accomplished (sometimes a 10 minute task turns into an hour or
two as what happened at one appointment), and then leave.  That's all very
time consuming and can be very frustrating.

I'll grant that he was AWOL a few times for remote-hands appointments.
But he was at Peer1 during reasonable and *unreasonable* hours too many
times to count!  If only we had a log -- I think that this discussion of
his being AWOL would be moot.

Finally, I think we can all agree that a transition from one life
situation to another can be very hectic.  There's no reason to browbeat
him over e-mails and bugzilla requests during that period (returning to
law school from working).  We all have our own ways of coping with such
changes, so expecting someone to do as you might is unreasonable.  But I
will grant he should have notified HCoop about his not being available.  I
can easily forgive that based on all he has done, though.

> I'm not a contentious person, so why am I being so adamant about this?
> Because I know an organization that allows one person to be ganged-up
> on will not be safe for anyone again. And it will not be a co-op, no
> matter what the web page says.

I think you are very wise to say that.  Instead of making someone a
scapegoat for delays, we should concentrate on the _root_ causes and how
to prevent them.  We should make positive changes, no negative ones.  ntk
made some suggestions in the parent post and I think they should be
considered by all members of the board (namely, day-to-day manager of
operations that is NOT on the board).

His suggestions show that he still wants to continue helping HCoop become
even better.  I'm very happy about that.


> --
> Michael Potter
> mpotter at hcoop.net
>

cheers,
Ryan