🚀 go-pugleaf

From article <janet.700133412@dunnart>, by janet@cs.uwa.oz.au (Janet Jackson):
> The members of AUUG who don't get promised articles in on time should consider
> themselves criticised also.  I know it's hard, but you can do it if you try.
> Janet Jackson

As one those guilty parties who have probably held up an AUUGN because
of not getting an article in on time, I can perhaps pour a little
oil on the waters here (as long as it doesn't catch fire). *I* accept the
valid criticism, but please don't flame the editor. It is a thankless
job that requires dedication, perserverance, and a thick hide.

AUUGN (and its poor editor) are victims of deadlines not being met, and
in spite of much exhortation and encouragement, there is still a dearth
of good locally-written technical papers for AUUGN. One reason is that
it takes effort and time to write an article, and in these recession
days some employers can't see the return for their people writing
newletter articles. It is also disappointing to see most articles
are coming from commercial organisations - where are the University
articles on operating system research? Where are the papers from the
CSIRO? Where are the people talking about Open Systems in government?
These people may be more interested in other (possibly overseas)
organisations, where there is a wider audience and a larger technical
readership.

Why is AUUGN having problems getting articles?

It may have something to do with changes in AUUG (a continuing
desire to make AUUG palatable to `commercial Open Systems' people), and
the possibly shrinking technical audience it is addressing, and the
fact that it is becoming a vehicle for more AUUG announcements/reports
(not a bad thing) and reprints from other affiliated organisations (such
as standards updates etc. - again, *possibly* not a bad thing).

*soapbox ON*

IMHO the problems with AUUGN are symptomatic of how the Open System
world has changed in the last few years; I think AUUG worked because
of the Unix community here was fairly isolated, and was small
and enthusiastic enough to be self-sustaining (this is probably
why WAUG is fairly dynamic, and outshines the other states in terms
of activities, benefits etc). I don't know if this is
the case any more in the general Australian Unix community.

One has only to look at the distressing way vendors
and commercial `our system is more open than theirs' presentations
dominated the last AUUG conference to realise that priorities have changed
and the technical (i.e interesting) nature of the conference was
greatly diminished. I have come to the conclusion that the old days
of AUUG are dead and buried, and from now on things are going to be
different. I think mainly due to the much better network connectivity
we have with overseas, there seems to be a turning away from local
collaboration, and much more interest in interaction with people
internationally.

What should be done then? I see a great hope in the state
conferences - these seem to be in the old spirit of AUUG conferences,
no sales pitches, strong techo stuff etc. Should this herald changes
in the way AUUG operates? I am not convinced that AUUG should be
presenting itself to the commercial world as the body for representing
all Open Systems concerns. If this occurs, AUUG may well become an
hollow shell, echoing with the empty mantras of the vendors as they
chant their Open Systems gospel, deserted by the people who formed
the original foundations.

As someone from the committee said at the AGM, `If we don't do it, then
someone else will'. As far as I am concerned, let someone else do it,
because I am not interested in where they are going.

Andrew McRae (andrew@megadata.mega.oz.au)      - My views only -

(I will also mail this to the AUUG exec.)