[UCLA-LUG] The squeaky LUG nuts get the grease

[FASHEH,MARK JAMES]

Absolutely.  A protagonistic attidute towards the STC will get us nowhere.
Also, I'm not sure if the LUG is the proper organization to deal with
this.  If people from the LUG want to meet with the Admins, great.  I
don't feel though that they should be representing the LUG at those
meetings.  There are several reasons why I say that.  1) Not everyone in
the LUG feels the same way about their policies, or is even affected by
them.  A significantly large number of people in fact, that I don't
believe a LUG presence at one of these meetings would be representative of
the groups attitude towards this.  2)  We are a linux users group, not a
policy lobbying group (whatever that means).  I don't think that this sort
of action lies within our defined purpose.  3)  This is not a linux only
rule.  Yes, lots of linux users would like static IP's, but I'm sure alot
of NT, Solaris, etc. people want one too.  People who want to take action
towards the STC should do it on behalf of all these people, and not the
LUG.  Anyways, all this is of course, IMHO, but I really feel that our
group has been taking a protagonistic attitude towards much of UCLA,
without realizing that we are (like it or not) first, and foremost, a part
of the UCLA community.  (Who do you think gives us our resources?).
	--Mark


------------
Mark James Fasheh
mfasheh@ucla.edu

On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Glenn Micah Glazer wrote:

> Does anyone know what percent of dorm users have a need/want for a static
> IP?  
> 
> Does anyone know what percent of administrative complaints are filed
> by Linux users?
> 
>                 ******
> 
> Let me be the first to say that I don't like the way that STC handles its
> administrative policies, but I think that I can see them being rather
> upset with us as well.  We bitch.  A lot.  We consistently hammer at the
> edges of legal behaviour, we require a great deal more of sysadmin time
> than Joe Dorm Bruin and we are, to boot, a distinct minority.  On their
> side of the table, we are a time-consuming irritant.
> 
> What I suggest is that we find our faculty sponsor in a hurry (like that
> anonymous CS prof - who is this person?) and then start a round of
> diplomatic meetings with the STC.  The point of these meetings is not to
> achieve some specific rule change, but rather to break down the walls we
> have built.  We need to assure the STC that we are not going to run havoc
> with their network and our sponsor can assure them that there are
> legitimate coursework processes behind our requests.  If we can turn this
> around to the point where the STC sees us as friends and safe users (*and*
> we see them as friends), I think that all of us will spend a lot lesss
> time lobbying them over specifics.
> 
> I am more than willing to volunteer to serve on such an envoy.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Glenn
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> UCLALUG Linux mailing list - Linux@linux.ucla.edu
> http://linux.ucla.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux
> 
>