NYC Group Organization

We encourage users to post events happening in the community to the community events group on https://www.drupal.org.
Tresler's picture

Hi,
I'm writing for a number of reasons. First, I'm announcing that I've removed myself as an admin of the NYC group. I've been less and less involved for some time now and I've reached the conclusion that my presence on the admin list without being more highly active isn't beneficial to the group, and, through causing confusion, is at times detrimental.

Second, while I will remain part of the group, I'd like to take this parting opportunity to strongly urge the group, and existing admins, to consider making a formal organization around the NYC group.

We've had a lot of drama in the past years, the most recent being the NYCCamp and DrupalCamp issues currently happening - but that wasn't the first or even the most contentious. I've come to believe that we are now large enough to warrant an elected body to handle the day to day tasks that are currently happening through a group of fine volunteers.

As a group we've expressed, time and time again, the value we put on transparency, respect, dialogue, and community support. However, 2070 people can't fit into our monthly meetup or even our Camp's. We don't currently have a viable way of gauging group will. And worse, we don't have a representative body to take that task on.

An elected body would set up roles and responsibilities that need to be handled in order for other group activities to progress smoothly. For example, currently our relationship with the Drupal Association must be through one person. Right now that person is a very helpful volunteer (non-admin), but is not an elected treasurer with defined responsibilities or accountability to a higher body regarding how funds are taken in and distributed. That is one example, but there are many more I'm sure we could gather.

So, in brief, if this seems like a good idea to anyone else, let's use this thread to start brainstorming regarding what such an organization would look like or be based from, and to garner group consent. Or, you know, tell me how wrong I am.

I'm available here or through my contact form for any correspondence.

Cheers!

Comments

Agreed. It's hard to know

drnikki's picture

Agreed. It's hard to know how and where to get involved with so many events, and there are so many (often conflicting) voices that it's generally easier to not get involved at all. It seems like what's been the way hasn't been working, so a new way is definitely in order.

Agreed

willyk's picture

A big +1 for Sam's suggestions. I think an organizing body would be helpful given the size of the NYC Community. In terms of brainstorming:

  1. Diverse Representation: It's be important that the composition of the group be representative of the diversity in NYC

  2. Consistent Meetings: I've done some other things like this, and found it helpful if there was a consistency to the meetings. Perhaps the group could try to meet quarterly/4 times per year, maybe on a saddle day next to some of our events?

Although we do have some drama in NYC, there is also a ton of positive energy that we can be channeling.

Disagree

ezra-g's picture

Another way of looking the situation is that we have several groups of folks
who work well together. The DrupalCampNYC folks work well together and
the NYCDrupal folks work well together.

In a group of 2,000+ people, it's reasonable to not expect everyone to
operate as one cohesive unit and to instead form subgropus around
interests and working styles, just as we have multiple meetups per
month. For that reason, I don't think it makes sense to establish an official board.

Additionally, how would this board be different from the elected group organizers, for which we already have a process?

Clarification

willyk's picture

My impression was that this overarching group would just help to provide for some improved coordination among the sorts of subgroups/interests that you are suggesting; as opposed to operation as a cohesive "unit".

I do think that is a

Tresler's picture

I do think that is a reasonable expectation, and the reason a formal body would be helpful. Take the current situation with one subgroup hosting 2 camps and another wanting to host a mini-con. All drama aside, if we had a President, Treasurer, and Secretary - that group - elected by the community could have resolved this in much shorter and more efficient means than a 60 comment long thread.

Currently, there is no set of organizers who can coordinate the subgroups and have any authority. Look at the questions happening in the other thread:

How is money being handled?
A) Argue about it, speculate, and reference generally accepted ideas - that are not 'rules'.
B) Ask the treasurer.

How does all this fit on a calendar together?
A) Argue, insist, create the event and hope.
B) Work with the secretary to find mutually agreeable dates.

There are many examples in which a board could provide a vehicle for facilitation and arbitration, that we currently have no means of doing.

Two suggestions: Look to the

greggles's picture

Two suggestions:

  1. Look to the Governance project that is forming with the intent of helping solve problems of organization across all of Drupal. They may have some advice (though they are early in forming).
  2. Talk to some folks in Los Angeles where a formal body was created a few years ago. They may have advice about benefits/drawbacks of creating a more formal structure.

Look to the larger group

forestmars's picture

+1 for looking to the Drupal Community Governance Group, who just released an initial report last week.

http://drupal.org/node/1526026#comment-6063880

We're not dealing with these issues in a vacuum, folks. There are a lot of minds working to refine our participatory model and Ethos.

Seting up a local board

scottwolpow's picture

I also think we need this. I set-up a board for another local user group that also holds events.
The board was set-up so that no person or group can seize control, nor serve more than 1 term in a position.
The only real power was to have a central clearing house for ideas and to approve events that will use community funds.
We have our own PayPal and bank account linked to the groups EIN.

It is just a entity to mutual spend funds. It does not have to file any returns or forms.

@Ezra What elections do we have? I have been coming to Drupal Meet-up for over 1 year and I have never heard about any election.

The process for becoming a

ezra-g's picture

The process for becoming a group organizer is documented at http://groups.drupal.org/node/109939 .

So to be clear...

Tresler's picture

becoming an elected organizer involves a 0.00096432 approval vote from the community and entails no actual power.

I don't see how this is analagous to a group elected official at all.

Changing that policy is easy.

ezra-g's picture

Changing that policy is easy. Setting up a new organization is complicated.

A board is limiting

ezra-g's picture

It seems our choices are:

A) Any group of folks can chose to organically organize any Drupal event they want. Attendees can chose to attend whichever events they feel serve their needs better. We've already heard from sponsors that they're happy to sponsor as many events as we can put on. In the case of NYCCamp, the camp is explicitly asking sponsors to not sponsor if those sponsors feel they have to chose one event over the other.

B) We attempt to setup a board and have a small number of community members with the power to deny groups the right to self-organize.

I question whether it's even possible for a board to hold such power. If it's in the name of the NYC group, someone could simply...form an alternative NY group.
We've seen in other communities (such as LA) setup "official boards" and that this only serves as yet another venue and issue for conflict.

Think of the babies.

forestmars's picture

Can't upvote this enough.

My sense is that doing this at this particular juncture could/would have a stifling effect on the group. I don't see it as a solution to the issues-at-hand, and really don't think we need to be forging that sword- which could end up being just a tool for cutting babies in half, if you'll excuse the metaphor.

I think you're putting carts

Tresler's picture

I think you're putting carts before horses. We haven't discussed what roles and responsibilities such a board with have, outside of the hypothetical, and we're jumping right to 'power to deny groups the right to self organize'.

What I'm talking about is a single point of contact that keeps tabs on the sub groups. There is a vast difference between saying, 'You may not have this event', and saying, 'Actually, would a weekend in mid-August be viable for your event, we have these other few things going on in July.'

Ultimately, the body would have control over group sponsored events. If you want it to be a 'NYC group event' it would need to be sanctioned by the board. Which I think if a great deal more efficient than our current system, which is general consensus.

And, as far as I know, g.d.o. moderators frown on multiple geographic groups and the DA only accepts one representative per region, so forming an alternative NY group may not be as straightforward as submitting a node form.

However, my main point stands. At the moment we have gridlock because official roles and responsibilities do not exist on the group level. They exist on committee's and event planning boards. For example, as things stand the only person who can touch the bank account was appointed for the DrupalCampNYC function. Asking him to take donations/distribute funds for any other event is problematic.

Policy was changed.

ezra-g's picture

And, as far as I know, g.d.o. moderators frown on multiple geographic groups and the DA only accepts one representative per region, so forming an alternative NY group may not be as straightforward as submitting a node form.

That policy was changed. See Approve Downtown Los Angeles group (which also has an elected board).

So, I think this makes null the point that

Ultimately, the body would have control over group sponsored events.

No... even if they did split

Tresler's picture

No... even if they did split - which again, I think is a pretty far hypothetical, and jumping to far extremes in this conversation - the board of this group, would still be able to affect this groups sponsored events.

scottwolpow's picture

Of course a board can hold power, if a group that self-organizes decides that way.

If this group wants to form a board, why should it be denied?

I would like to put it to a non-binding vote to measure what the community wants.

We, as the more vocal people, cannot decide for those who do not post.

Sanctioning vs. approving

LP's picture

B) We attempt to setup a board and have a small number of community members with the power to deny groups the right to self-organize.

Seems there might be room for a third option, where there's an event coordinating body, which wouldn't so much allow or deny self-organizing, but would rather:

  • Propose widely agreed upon standards (transparency, financial, etc.)
  • Attempt to help groups meet DUG-wide standards.

    In essence, a group that coordinates between broad group process and small group process. Just a notion, maybe silly.
    Focusing on events, and keeping an eye towards coordination rather than power make this a more lightweight notion than full-on board structures, and opens mile-high thinking.
  • JM2C

    amycham's picture

    I've been trying to avoid all this, but it keeps landing in my inbox, and this seems like the most constructive conversation...

    I do not want to see the group so formalized that people feel they can't just take an idea and run with it. However, with a group of over 2,000 people and multiple significant events, I don't think it's realistic to think we can operate effectively without some kind of leadership.

    Leadership doesn't have to mean dictating rules and regulations, or stopping people from acting independently. As LP suggests, it can just mean having a few people who know what's going on and can advise others, and some agreed-upon guidelines that make it easier to meet community expectations and understand things like how DA funds and "official" vs "unofficial" community events work, or what is really meant by "transparency."

    I do think that some form of election is good, too, as it would help composition of the "board" to stay aligned with evolving community interests and reduce randomness of people popping in and out of these roles.

    Rather than having a stifling effect, knowing what's expected of you can actually make it easier to act independently.


    Amy C. Cham
    Twitter: amycham