37
Anyone who wants to give managing the XOOPS project a decent try will get my blessing. So I support this thread.
Here's a couple of points to take into consideration when coming up withthe best form and method to manage here. These are from my ample experience and professional opinion, so please don't dismiss them offhand.
About democracy. Democracy is good, but in too many posts I see only a single sided view on democracy within the XOOPS project. Democracy -where I live- also means paying taxes and abiding to the law, and that those people put in charge make the final desicions without your further approval. This is indeed no direct democracy but a representative democracy, but mostly this applies to direct democracy as well.
Now, applied to the XOOPS community, this would mean that there'd be a way to define taxes (what does the community need to give in order to have the democracy work properly), and for everyone to abide the laws laid down. At the moment, I don't see the community being taxed in any way, nor do a lot of people abide by those few moral and ethical laws that we have laid down in the XOOPSiquette and the GPL license.
And then there's the discussion of democracy vs. meritocracy. Meritcocratic decisions are made by people who have proved that they're capable and worthy of making those decisions in the past. Sometimes the XOOPS project has shown itself capable of working as a maritocratic project. But nowadays all I see is personal attacks on those that have stepped up and little to no real discussion. In short, a huge amount of drama, but very little storyline. Having been (and still being) the brunt of those personal attacks, I can say that this is deeply demotivating, and has an adverse effect. Why would I listen to what those people attacking *me* have to say? I've never been one to shun a real debate, and if the outcome isn't in your favor, live with it. That's whateverocracy. But if it is, you get all the credits. That's how I've tried to work, but some people don't think that is enough. They're right, and the world should know and recognise that.
My point here isn't my bitterness or disappointment, but that this is a fact of life for this project. The loudest get the most attention, and this is often mistaken as 'the will of the community'. If you're going to manage XOOPS, you'll have to find a way to deal with decisions not being questioned at every turn. And that the decisions are made professionally. Sometimes, the will of the community isn't good enough.
Another point I'd like to give you is about transparency. This is a huge issue. I've probably set the bad example there in the past, but I definately wasn't alone in this. You see, when it comes down to it, everyone wants the other to be as transparent as possible. But when it comes down to self-transparency, there are a lot of reasons why this isn't possible or wishful. Transparency is also vulnerable, and doing that is difficult at the best of times.
A very wise man told me yesterday that if you have transparency at the top of your list, your aim is to become invisible. Because, when you're fully transparent, nobody will see you. Now there's a conundrum. True transparency means no need for roadmaps and plans. No need for deadlines. No need for teams and communications. Because everyone would be able to find out for themselves. So, then there'd be no need for the XOOPS project (meaning as an organised project, not as an application).
My point here is that if you're going to manage any project, you will need room to think, discuss and plan. You need a place to negotiate, and when everything is out in the open, there's no room to negotiate. In fact, as soon as there are more then one interest at hand, you will need room to coordinate and plan. When is the best time to release this news, what steps are we going to take, who will finish that part of the project and let everyone know...
Then there's the point of scale and dimensions of the organization. WHat is the Community, and the Project? Are they the same? Then why is there a staff of people that should do the work for the community in the name of the project? Who gets to decide how the application develops, and how the community itself is run? Who gets the power to realise things on the websites? How are those decisions made? How do you deal with conflicts, and how do you keep people to their promises? Who gets to say what is in the best interest of everyone? Who gets to vote? ANd vote on what? And why?
These are not easy issues to solve and do right. They're at the heart of the problems we now see. I'm looking forward to seeing real solutions and a lot less drama and shouting at everything. This means less ego.
Now, as a last point I'd like to plug the XOOPS Foundation here. Please consider how this would fit into your plans. It is there, and has been working behind the scenes on securing the continuity of the XOOPS project, whichever way it will go. The Foundation definatley does not lead XOOPS (nor should it, ever). But is is the only legal representative of the XOOPS project (not the community), so use that properly.
Herko
