🚀 go-pugleaf

andrew@megadata.mega.oz.au (Andrew McRae) writes:

>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.

Andrew, I agree with what you said except the above.  The editor should
accept criticism as long as they are valid criticism.  It may be a
thankless task, but when a person accept the job, he/she accept the
responsiblities associated with the job.  It does not matter what the
the job is.  One of the editor's job should be to get AUUGN out on time.
It does not matter what cause the dalay.  If the editor cannot overcome
the delay, then the editor should accept the responsibility for it being
late - NOTHING should change that.  However, when the member of AUUG
look at the performance of the editor, the various difficulties in
getting the job done should then be taken into account.

We in Australia seem to have this culture problem that everyone demmands
their rights but none want the responsibilities that goes hand in hand
with the rights.  I believe the increase in local content in AUUGN is a
step in the right direction and Jagoda should be praised for that but
she should also be reminded that letting a bimonthly magazine miss its
deadline for two months is definitely not a good idea.

I see Janet's posting as a valid criticism and it is unfortunate that
Jagoda got into a defensive shield and reject other's critism.  All I
can say is that if you are going to hold a public office (e.g. on the
AUUG committee) then you have to prepare to accept criticism.  If you
cannot take criticism, then you should get out. (P.S. This is a general
statement and is not aimed at Jagoda.)

Patrick