On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:32:08AM -0400, Bill Strosberg wrote: > On 12-03-22 10:05 AM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > > Another factor to consider is a question of demographics of > > participants. If we are looking at a seniors' club, then parking is > > going to be more important and perhaps not too late. If we are looking > > at a students' club, then centrallity and transit are going to be > > important since fewer youth are placing the value in owning motor > > vehicles in the last 5-10 years than the 50 before that, which is > > partly due to the disruptive technologies we meet to discuss. Perhaps > > I am nostalgic for societies that value intergenerational > > collaboration, but I think it makes sense to make an effort to > > accomodate both in this particular area of interest. Does it make > > sense to restrict ourselves to Linux specific topics, or open source > > software (and perhaps hardware?) in general? > > From a club viability perspective Richard is right (as usual). I share > the same nostalgia for intergenerational collaboration. Given the > geography, culture and climate of Canada, I think it is going to take a > long time to wean ourselves off personal vehicles. At 51 guess I'm now > a senior? I spend around an hour most days on my bike in the summer, so > I don't feel like one. I was thinking more of the retired set who (may not) have more time on their hands. There is wisdom to share, whether or not the younger generations value it. I got great value from attending OCUNIX meetings in the 1990s, recognizing the wisdom in the room. > I wonder (having done no substantive research) how well collaborative > Open Source communication technologies work for large scale meetings? > (25-50 live participants?) Video conferencing for Board meetings may > alleviate some physical attendance pressure. I use telephone based > conference calls very frequently for client meetings as geography > prevents face to face meetings. This can be very valuable for some specialized or dispersed communities, but meatspace is equally important. > There may be a lot of value in investing in working with disruptive > virtual presence meetings, as the scope of possible members may > increase, and the geographical lines drawn may become less relevant. > Being able to "watch" club presentations after their "live" broadcast > would be far more interesting than reviewing presentations without the > audio, the questions, the responses and the community. From 20,000 > feet, this is where I think "social" applications should be - I hate the > reality that an American corporate entity run by a miserable spoiled > brat "owns" all the interpersonal communication between today's youth. > Open, free and non-commercial social participation using the Internet as > backbone would be far more acceptable to me than freely allowing > corporate America to mine my son's traffic and sell him to the highest > bidders. I suspect this has less value for our group and may well help to destroy it due to the intrinsic geographical nature of our group. I have witnessed and perhaps contributed to the demise of such a geographically based group by offering and providing an online communications forum. > Just a thought. Certainly would be far more eco-friendly than driving > my fossil fuel dinosaur belching it's planet killing crap. So walk, ride your bike, take the bus, or bring a friend to the meeting with you. The latter will kill two birds with one stone. :) With enough interest (which is our current major battle) having seperate meetings in Ottawa, Kanata and Orleans would address some of that. > Although I certainly would miss the Beer Sig! And this is a very important point. My observation is that advocacy groups that have a strong social component tend to remain cohesive and are better able to evolve with the needs and times than those without. > Bill slainte mhath, RGB -- Richard Guy Briggs -- ~\ -- ~\ <hpv.tricolour.net> <www.TriColour.net> -- \___ o \@ @ Ride yer bike! Ottawa, ON, CANADA -- Lo_>__M__\\/\%__\\/\% Vote! -- <greenparty.ca>_____GTVS6#790__(*)__(*)________(*)(*)_________________