[Board] Web Officer

[Matt Arnold]

On Dec 3, 2007 10:28 PM, Garrett Kajmowicz <gkajmowi at tbaytel.net> wrote:
> After the last meeting I've done a little thinking about the points raised.
>
> The main concern was over potential conflict between the web officer and
> ConChair vision.
>
> Above all else, the ConChair shuold have two options to address issue:
> 1)  Bring the issue to the board for a final decision.  This is the preferred
> resolution mechanism.
>
> 2)  Obtain separate hosting elsewhere out of the budget (to be avoided as it
> costs us more and would duplicate effort).
>
> It is the role of the web officer to provide web site facilities which meet
> the requirements of the board as well as the ConChair.  The express purpose
> of PenguiCon is to put on one or more annual conventions.  If we aren't
> working toward that end, we need to revisit our purpose for existing.
>
> The first thing to ask is:  What requirements does the board itself have?  I'd
> like to propose:
> -     Section where we can put corporate documents (bylaws, minutes, budgets,
> tax returns, etc.)
> -     Information on board members (yes, it's pure vanity)
>
> The question which does need to be answered is wether we want to be able to
> archive the site for each year for posterity or not.  If not, no work is
> required.  If yes, then all of the web technologies selected *must* be able
> to get us a static version of the page which will live for eternity.
> Something which requires a PHP, Python, Plone, (or worse, livejournal) site
> will be nearly impossible to deal with.  Fortunately, some web technologies
> like WordPress (written in PHP) are readily set up to be "Web Whacked" so
> that we can generate final static HTML once the convention is over.  This
> decision will fundamentally shape the technologies available to the ConChair.
> Technologoes which the ConChair would like to use may not meet these
> requirements and be disallowed.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -     Garrett
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at penguicon.org
> http://penguicon.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>


As current Minister of Communications, if that title is more than a
figurehead, and as Conchair-elect if that's worth anything before
April, I do not believe that static versions of the websites need to
be preserved. We need our wiki back, which I will update ferociously.
Then put Board documents and info on that and on Google Documents.

In past years, I've experienced frustration about the website, because
as Minister of Communication I was willing to do massive amounts of
work, but despite the title I had relatively little influence over the
Communication Department for the system in which I would perform that
work.

I am obsessed with perfecting the chain of information from Program
Participants, to Track Heads, to Head of Programming, to program book
/ website / signage, to attendees. Somebody else would fall down in
that chain. I had no authority to tell the program book, head of
programming, webmaster, or others in that chain: "I have carefully
considered our discussion, and decided we are doing it this way. If
it's something you can't get excited about, I understand and
sympathize. Rest assured you do not have to fear harming Penguicon by
stepping down, because your replacement is waiting in the wings. It
has been a true pleasure my friend, thank you very much for all you've
done and I hope we work together again." There has been great
satisfactory progress in this area this year, especially on the web;
but please be aware that I stepped up to the role of 2009 Conchair
partly in order to get this power.

If you want to take that away, I will accept it. I'd just like to know
why. Do you see a problem with the existing year-to-year structure, to
which you feel the solution is to take a particular decision away from
the Conchair? In particular, do you feel there is something I,
personally, cannot or should not provide for? (If you do, you can say
so.) There is a interesting Venn diagram concerning "trusted to do
work to make something happen" and "possessing authority to make
decisions about it". This Board Tech Infrastructure position should be
designed in light of who you want to take one or both of those away
from, and where you want to vest one or both of them. No one belongs
in the Work Venn circle without energy, and no one belongs in the
Permission Venn circle without wisdom / knowledge. I don't know
software administration very well, but I do know content editors and
surfers.

I'm trying to move everybody around within that Venn diagram. The
Board has moved themselves into an awesome place on that diagram in
recent months. Kudos. Keep it up, I am your biggest fan. Please
autograph my copy of the bylaws. (I was especially enthralled by the
climax of the story when it turned out that The Party Of The First
Part did it, not the butler after all!)

You addressed the question of the purpose for the Board to exist. My
view is that the Board should have two focuses.

The first should be on Conchair selection, who to trust not to abscond
to Bermuda with the exchequer, who to trust with the type of total
control that our Conchairs have usually had, with an eye to figuring
out what that Conchair's strengths and weaknesses are, and attempting
to fill the deficits. For instance, I need you this year because I
have no interest in guest selection, budgets, and hotels. I've got
Chuck for that. Also I am getting marketing interns to cover my
marketing weaknesses. What I do well is recruit and lead teams, track
progress, and act as spokesperson. In the future you may have a
Conchair with a totally different mix or whose focus is on fixing
different dysfunctions.

The second focus should be on long-term vision with an eye to
financial health, and a marketing eye on where the geek mileau is
moving. It's like Walt Disney saying "I'm going to stop focusing on
the Animation Department, leave that in my employees' capable hands,
and start making live action movies. Or hey, how about a theme park?"
Structural decisions like that would include whether to:

- do something which you suddenly realize is needed, to make Penguicon
more difficult to highjack or subvert.
- start an annual tech educational seminar in the week leading up to Penguicon.
- have more than one Penguicon per year if the convention grows too
large and loses what we like about it.
- rename the convention in 2042 because computing clouds don't use
operating systems any more, "open source" and "software" are quaint
anachronisms, and (fill in the blank) is where it's at.
- set up an annual award for science fiction that inspires software,
and software that embodies science fictional social vision or averts
futuristic dystopia.

-Matt