[KLUG Members] Stopping to talk to people and the dangers of legal misinterpretation ...

[Bryan J. Smith]

- Pushing for 501c3

It was just brought to my attention that KLUG is pushing towards 501c3
status.  I may remember hearing about this before, but since I'm
involved with about 20 LUG/NUGs around the US (a dozen here in Florida),
combined with the fact that I don't pay much attention to "management"
issues in a LUG/NUG, I don't really make a conscience note of it. 
Because of my "loose approach" to support lists (as anyone can see),
even when I'm nominated for a LUG/NUGs officer position (because of my
technical experience), I decline (even after persistent begging) because
I feel I am a liability.

- The KLUG "Install Master" who didn't realize what he was ;-P

In the case of KLUG, a few months ago I was asked to be the "Install
Master" for KLUG since I had a lot of hardware expertise.  I didn't
realize what this entailed, especially since I'm in Orlando, but I was
under the impression I wouldn't have that much responsibility -- largely
because I wrongly assumed I wouldn't be the only guy (because I can't
make KLUG's InstallFests physically ;-).  So I said I'd help out where I
could and was in the middle of updating the request form with more
modern info (I just thought that was my "main task").  So I tried to
help out people with their hardware configurations, took several
non-Linux discussions to the HARDWARE list (even if I helped generate
some of them), and answered a few of forms directly.

- That same, normally accommodating, "Master" not realizing what he did

In the meanwhile, I made a 2 posts on the KLUG lists of a self-interest
and/or commercial nature.  The first time I did it, it was a clear
violation of list policy and I was just ignorant (my fault).  The second
time I did it, it wasn't such a "cut'n dry" one so I really didn't think
of it at the time (I'm just not used to seeing such a policy -- that's
NOT saying I "disagree" with it though), but I totally understand now
what it was still not kosher.  I made an honest mistake and I was
sorry.  After the first event, I was warned, but mistook the warning to
mean no direct commercial soliciting.  So when I added a P.S. which was
really directed at the original poster, I just wasn't thinking.  Again,
my mistake am I really trying to accommodate the wishes of the group as
best as I can as long as I realize it.  No excuse, I know.

- The "Master" who cannot keep an "ear to the ground" 2000 miles away

Now I want everyone to remember right now that I'm 2000 miles away from
you'all.  I'm not at the meetings nor the installfests, so I cannot talk
to anyone, nor get a "feel" of what is going on, what issues exist,
etc...  Because I was this "Install Master" I was on the volunteer list,
but I already directly support another 3 LUG/NUGs (JAXLUG, LEAP, DABNUG)
-- at probably the equivalent of an "officer" in each based on my load
-- so I always don't have time to read all the business on KLUG's
Volunteer.  AFAIK, I didn't have any idea I was causing a "legal issue"
inside of KLUG with my last few posts.  I often trust one KLUG member to
"inform me" of anything "important."

- Another helpful KLUG volunteer who tries to keep the "Master" informed

Fortunately for me, that same KLUG member just took the time to informed
me that those 2 posts where causing a stir in the management.  Since
KLUG is up for 501c3 consideration, my posts could clearly be taken as a
commercial interest taking advantage of a non-profit organization.  Per
laws government a 501c3 corporation, an entity cannot benefit in such
ways.  I didn't think of this, especially in seeing how other non-profit
LUGs conduct their business, but it is a very good stance to have.  And
that same KLUG member nicely pointed that out for me, which instantly
made a lot of sense (and made me wanted to take a frying pan to my head
;-).

- The KLUG Chairman who was put in a position where he had to act

UNfortunately for me, I got this E-mail about the same time.  I'm going
to post it here on the Members list because it is an OFFICIAL KLUG
ACTION FROM THE CURRENT KLUG CHAIRMAN:

   Subject:  Notification
   "Mr. Bryan Smith
    For the following reasons, I am removing you from our volunteer
    position of Install Master.
    To our knowledge, you have not responded to any of the users who
    have filled out any install requests.
    I cannot allow a member of our volunteers group to repeatedly
    violate the policies of our mailing lists.
    We really need to begin looking for local install master again.
    Thank you for your understanding.
    Dirk Bartley
    Chairman
    Kalamazoo Linux Users Group"

I apologize for reposting his message here but it is, ironically, the
_only_way_ I can actually show that he was NOT being partial here.  Dirk
sounds like a nice guy put in a tough spot and he had no choice.

As such, I'm not upset with Mr. Bartley nor should I be.  He is simply
and genuinely responsible for the well being of the group.  He has to
answer to others and be concerned about its future.  He cannot possibly
know that I've had _no_idea_ what my "responsibilities" actually are as
"Install Master" (I didn't even know that was my "title"!), and he did
warn me once about the commercial posting.  I'm 2000 miles away and I
can't really get a "feel" for what people mean over E-mail, so I didn't
even realize I was _remotely_ "screwing up."

- The "Install Master" that shouldn't have been

Now that I _know_ what my responsibilities as "Install Master" (let
alone my title!), I know I am *NOT* the guy for the job!  I'm 2000 miles
away!  If I could make the InstallFests, damn I'd be eating this stuff
up like I do at LEAP, JAXLUG, DABNUG, MLINUX, FLU, etc...  But I'm not,
so my dedication to KLUG is sporadic at best.

But this leaves an interesting "flavor" in my mouth because I've gone
several months without people not really caring that I understood a good
number of things.  People are people, and volunteers cannot do
everything but, again, it's hard for me to keep my "ear to the ground"
from 2000 miles away.  People need to stop and explain things to me in
more detail via E-mail than someone who makes meetings.  I cannot simply
"talk" to people freely and "get a feel" for what's up, what I'm doing
good/bad/etc...

[ Side note:  This is why KLUG's "3 meetings to membership" policy is a
_very_good_ one to have. ]

- Where the politics begin ...

It's pretty clear why this occurred.  To at least one person, my posts
were very detrimental to the possible future decision on KLUG's 501c3
status.  As such, my actions need to be dealt with "swiftly and
decisively."  To do otherwise was to introduce a liability into KLUG
which KLUG doesn't need.  This is _very_wise_ from a legal standpoint.

But I've got a better one.  A better one would have been to delete the
possible "501c3 issues" from the archives, and e-mail or even call Bryan
collect and talk to him about "dude, don't do this because of this!"  It
seems several people think I am "intentionally" violating the KLUG rules
-- rules that I normally don't run into (but I *DO* respect and
understand *NOW*).  And 

This is _very_scary_ because, again, at the same my "friend" E-mailed me
and tried to discuss this, others had convinced the Chairman that he had
"no choice" but to "act now."

What?  I'm a pretty "accommodating" guy.  Talk to me, and I'll
accommodate _anyone_, on _anything_.  My favorite quote is of Howard
Cosell on why he called a Mr. Clavis by the name of Mr. Ali when no one
else would, "the man wants to be called Mohammed Ali, so I called him
Mohammed Ali."

- ELUG and SVLUG splits, all during 501c3 candidancy

In 1999, the ELUG group in Orlando experienced a split.  And years
before that, SVLUG experienced one as well.  The reason?  Both groups
were undergoing 501c3 moves that resulted in major personal conflicts. 
At the _heart_ of _both_ was one person why had experience with "big"
501c3s.  LUGs are normally very "little" 501c3s.

The gentlemen from the ELUG group, who was there even near the beginning
of ELUG, was the guy who had been involved with a few "big" 501c3. 
Because of a single, possible legal issue (which actually was proven to
be a non-legal issue later), he almost singlehandedly convinced everyone
that the founder of ELUG, and the ELUG name, should be abandoned like a
disease.  Well _before_ the ELUG founder even _knew_ it was an issue!

Even I was there, unknowing _until_ the politics started to fly, and the
"liability" stuff came up.  At that point many of us said, "Hey, why
can't we just talk about this and resolve it?"  It was clear the ELUG
founder now understood what was wrong, and basically made it a non-issue
(and it _was_ a non-legal one as it was later proven).  But everyone was
just confused, most of all the original ELUG founder who felt bad for
what he did.  But then he realized that didn't excuse the "vantage
point" one person used over him -- without even realizing it!

Getting all parties involved, discussion and other due process
techniques at resolving at a "resolution" is far better and more
effective.  In fact, all it takes is someone pointing out something
something didn't understand fully to resolve!  As would have been that
case!  Often 5 months of turmoil could have been reduced into 5 minutes
of education.  But its hindsight for many -- especially when it comes to
anything that is just blindly labeled as a "legal issue" in
misinterpreted fear.

- Conclusion:  explain, discuss, resolve

If you tell you kid what they did wrong, and punish them, what does that
mean?  It'll mean you'll be punishing them a lot.  You need to explain
why something is wrong -- and sometimes it takes more than once.  Why? 
The circumstances may be different -- and what you may think is the same
someone may not even remotely associate to the similar.  And the worst
thing you can do is tell someone else to do the rebuke!

We can pick apart various legal issues all over the place.  God knows
one of the things I did to the new "LEAP" group when they first started
up with talk about trademark issues (LEAP had over 400
registered/pending, ELUG had 0) to the fact that they will still
controlling the ELUG server and lists, even though they wanted to be
"legally separate" for these "legal reasons" (God that was a joke --
weeks later and still going on!).  I mean, if you want to "play
politics," it is very easy and you can "feel good" about what you are
doing -- especially if you feel you are legally "in the right."  But it
solves nothing.

It's more difficult to actually stop and talk to someone.  Especially
someone that didn't even know how much damage they were causing -- let
alone figured it would be because he did other things (like flaming,
posting too much, etc...).  I just did NOT know _anything_ -- honestly,
_anything_!  This is why the _only_ "completely successful" 501c3 LUGs I
know of had people that had _never_ done a 501c3 before.  Because there
wasn't all these assumptions and "we have to avoid the inability to
never please the IRS enough, etc..." BS.

Which is why I don't want to be a KLUG member subscriber anymore.  Most
everyone here is very good, very accommodating -- especially with my
"abrasive nature" in E-mails.  Heck, if I was going to be kicked out of
the Volunteers group, it should have been about that.  But this other
stuff, and the "assumptions" on _both_sides_ were just wrong.  Since I'm
2000 miles away, there's no way for me to "see" these things at the
meetings -- so I didn't know what the "fuss" was about until someone
else actually pointed it out to me!  And someone cannot even tell me so
_before_ a decision is made.  That's a bit scary in my book -- something
that tells me it's "time to go."

- Turning the back that big clock

So that "big" 501c3 experienced guy that co-founded LEAP?  He has
_always_ been one of my very good personal friends!  I had 0 loyalty to
the ELUG founder, but I had to say, "hey, you're raking him over the
coals for what?  A 'possible' legal issue?" (one that _never_ was). 
Yep, a year later, he told me he wished he could turn back the clock. 
But hindsight is something we don't have, and I'm sure he really thought
he was doing the "right thing."

Please, please I urge you to _never_ just make "quick decisions" out of
"liability fears" -- it's a great way to hurt someone, someone who is
_very_open_ to doing _exactly_ as you wish if you would just take 2-3
minutes to explain the "issue" to them.  I know my friend wish he would
have.

-- Bryan J. Smith
   Oviedo, FL
   Formerly of KLUG

-- 
Bryan J. Smith, E.I.                    SmithConcepts, Inc.
(407)489-7013 (Mobile)             http://SmithConcepts.com
mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org          Consulting Engineers and
BS Computer Engineering                    IT Professionals
CompTIA Linux+ Certified       Vendor Independent Solutions