Re: [PLUG] webcasting

["Michael C. Toren" <mct@netaxs.com>]

> > No one person has had to make such a decision in the past.  What typically
> > happens is that major issues (for example, which venue to hold future
> > meetings at) are discussed on the mailing list, and a general consensus is
> > reached.  Once in a blue moon it becomes clear that a consensus won't be
> > possible, and some type of voting is initiated.
> >
> > It has worked remarkably well for a long time now.
> 
> I can think of 2 situations contrary to that - the meetings are/were at I-Q
> because they had *1* person they could co-ordinate thru - Darxus. If just
> any member had called IQ and asked for the room/use of bandwidth/etc, bet
> you that they would not have been so free with the resources.
> 
> The meeting at Cigna. Came about because the folks at Cigna had *1* person -
> Tony - they could co-ordinate thru. If you or I (or any other Plug member
> that the cigna powers-in-charge did not know), NO WAY would we have been
> able to use that resource.

You are correct that both at IQ and at Cigna we received offers to host
PLUG because an employee of the respective companies also happened to be a
PLUG member.  But, just because an offer was made doesn't mean that PLUG,
as a group, accepted.  It wasn't an order to meet at IQ or Cigna, it was
an offer, which was discussed on the list and then accepted once a general
consensus had been reached.

> Granted that neither of them is an official officer of the group, but both
> situations were at least partially dependent upon the identity of the person
> who originally made the request. Would not have happened if "anybody could
> speak for the group"; in these cases, it was because of a SINGLE INDIVIDUAL
> who spoke for the group.

Yes, those single individuals made offers to the group, which were very
much appreciated!  But no, those single individuals did not speak for the
group as a whole.

-mct