🚀 go-pugleaf

In <9212617.25046@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> ggr@corowa.acci.com.au (Greg Rose) writes:

>Leaving aside that subject for a moment, I'd like to get some
>discussion going about directions for AUUG. In the recent past there
>has been a very "us and them" split in the group, with the parties
>being called "technical versus commercial" or "practical versus
>long-haired", depending on your point of view. (Fortunately I'm
>bipartisan, bisexual, or bi-something anyway).

>I think that the split is along the wrong axis. I think there are
>"oldies versus youngies", and that some of the problems facing AUUG
>stem from a sort of generation gap. That doesn't mean that the oldies
>are essentially technical (long haired), or that the newies are
>exclusively commercial (practical), although there are certainly
>correlations available. ...

[chilling examples of UNIX archeology deleted]

I don't think that it's possible to split the AUUG in two.
People are just not in general that polarised (IMHO). Very
few members I believe would be at the extremes suggested by
only two categories. Your own "schizophrenia" on the matter
shows that there is an overlap of interest and bias,
therefore a simple split simply would not work.

This is basically why I believe that two polarised UNIX user
groups in Australia won't work, because the membership would
often have to make a choice of which to join, and which not
to join. Probably, that would result in less total
membership, and the remaining membership would likely have a
high proportion of overlap.

>One of the reasons I originally joined AUUG was to get to meet other
>people with like interests, discuss the fun stuff we were doing, keep
>up to date, and to HELP and to BE HELPED. Pass on folklore, and that
>sort of thing. ...

That's why a lot of the current, and ex-membership joined,
judging by their comments.

>           ... Now it seems to me that there is a great opportunity to
>continue doing exactly that, except increasingly there is a mismatch
>between what the groups of people want to talk about. Not much point
>talking about a great hack in the Unix kernel when practically no-one
>has access to the source code they are running any more. And when the
>youngies want to know exactly what features they want when they buy
>their next open system, they seem to hear nothing back except "they're
>all rubbish anyway, give me V7 anyday", (a sentiment with which I
>agree wholeheartedly, although irrationally, but that is irrelevent to
>the point). Such responses are not satisfying to EITHER party.

Again, there are those who have interests in both areas.
Some may be biased to the "youngies" and others to the
"oldies". It's all a matter of perspective.

I feel that AUUG is useful as it stands, if it recognizes
and _exploits_ the range of interests and ideas. I have
mentioned before that it is a good environment for people to
seek independent (not necessarily unbiased) advice from
users, implementors, developers, heck; even marketing types.

One of the great strengths of AUUG in the past was the
number of members who actually knew what they were talking
about, and who would be inclined to provide advice. I'm not
implying that this has ceased, it's just that the focus of
expertise has "blurred".

The great quest for more members and higher profile has not,
as far as I can tell, exploited the fact that AUUG has
collectively thousands of years of UNIX experience. This has
ignored the most invaluable of member benefits.

>There are a bunch of "Grand Challenges" in the Open Systems world that
>need both oldies and youngies to think about them.

>- Why is Unix bloated and ugly now, when it wasn't before? How do we
>  reverse the trend?

UNIX has always been beautiful, and always will be (;-)). It's
your perspective that's changing.

>- Why, if OSI is the way to go, are we still using TCP/IP?

You can make up more naighty descriptions of what TCP/IP
stands for than OSI.

>- Why, if TCP/IP works so well, do we need OSI?

Because it's a TLA. And there aren't nearly enough TLAs in computing. >:)

>- How are we going to handle telecommunications in a world where a 1
>  bit yes/no answer takes longer to come back than a 10 megabyte question
>  took to send?

I want to know who's answering the question ;-), and who's asking.

>These are the sorts of questions that we all need to talk about, and
>the oldies aren't always going to be the ones that know the answers
>either.

Precisely. And that is the reason why AUUG should not be
viewed as a split group, rather as one with more diverse
interests than it had 5 or 10 years ago.
-- 
+-----+ Bernd Felsche                     _--_|\  #include <std/disclaimer.h>
| | | | MetaPro Systems Pty Ltd          /      \ bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au
| | | | 328 Albany Highway,              X_.--._/         Fax: +61 9 472 3337
|m|p|s| Victoria Park, Western Australia 6100  v        Phone: +61 9 362 9355