Hmmm,
Great track record....
<humor, weak>
Advocates for the 1000 and 2000?  Did they
also represent Studebaker, Beta-max and
Tab soda?
</humor>
Frank Letts (aka 'Fast Frank')
http://freeweb.pdq.net/fbt1
[log in to unmask]
> From: John Korb <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: MPE SIB now available on the web
> Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 9:42 AM
>
> Ok, this touches a nerve.
>
> (putting flame suit on)
>
> Traditionally, Interex has been (and still is as far as I can tell) a
> non-profit professional organization with the purpose of making the
desires
> of the HP 3000 community (and HP 9000, NT, and once upon a time HP 2000
and
> HP 1000 communities) known to HP.  It is an advocacy roll.
>
> Some professional organizations are vendor-specific, like Interex, and
> others are industry-wide in scope (like the ACM and IEEE for example).
One
> thing that (in my experience) all the vendor-specific professional
> organizations have in common is their advocacy roll.  They establish a
> close relationship with the vendor and act as the voice of their
membership.
>
> While such organizations often have a wide user base (very large
companies
> with dozens or hundreds of high-end processors, to small companies with a
> single, bottom-of-the-line processor), they exist in part to make the
voice
> of the small shop heard, and not drowned out by the clamboring of the
very
> large shops, many of which have their own one-on-one meetings with the
> vendor.  This is possible because a multitude small shops gain a larger
> voice through their membership in the organization.
>
> But it takes money for the vendor-specific professional organization to
> fulfill its advocacy roll.  The membership dues go to fund many things.
> Some of that money goes to fronting meetings (like IPROF) where there is
a
> direct exchange of ideas and information with HP engineers and managers,
> some goes towards an annual conference (HPWORLD), some goes to supporting
> regional users groups (the RUGs, BWRUG in my area), the monthly
> publications, the contributed software library and its maintenance, the
> SIGs (Special Interest Groups), and even the surveys and ballots -- like
> the SIB.
>
> Years ago I was an Interex volunteer (I'm not at present).  Tony
remembers,
> as we worked together as Interex volunteers for a number of years.  Back
> then Interex had a "System Improvement Committee" (SIC) and it put out a
> SIC ballot.  Putting out a ballot is not a cheap thing to do.  It costs
> money.  That money comes from Interex and member dues.  There is also a
lot
> of labor involved in creating the ballot.  I'm very familiar with how the
> SIC ballot was created, and somewhat familiar with how the SIB is
created,
> so I appologize if I have information about the SIB incorrect.
>
> In the days of the SIC, it took months of effort to create the ballot.
> Requests for ballot items were received and collected.  The first step
was
> to call the author of the request and verify the request.  Often it was
> found that the request needed minor re-wording, and the re-wording of the
> request was done over the phone.
>
> The "cleaned up" request was then ready for further processing.  The
> requests were then read for content, looking specifically for duplicate
or
> near duplicate requests.  This sometimes required additional calls to the
> authors to either broaden the scope of their request, or limit the scope.
>
> When the data collection was complete, the SIC would meet and over two
very
> long days, would review the requests, resolve any scope questions, and
> discuss the requests with HP engineers and managers.  This gave HP a
"heads
> up" on what issues/requests the users had brought up, and also gave HP a
> chance to do two things:  1) evaluate the requests for feasability,
amount
> of effort, length of effort, staff availability, product integration
> testing, total cost, and many other factors, and 2) compare the
preliminary
> SIC ballot with what they internally believed to be the "hot" items.
>
> When the SIC and composed the ballot, it was then sent to the Interex
> offices for production.  Production involved getting the ballot printed,
> getting the ballots stuffed in large envelopes, getting the envelopes
> mailed to the membership, and finally, receiving and tallying the
results.
> Printing, stuffing, mailing, and tallying the ballots costs a
considerable
> amount.  It is not cheap.  The annual SIC meeting, the phone calls to the
> request authors, and all the other administrative costs also added up.
> Were it not for volunteers and the hours they donate to Interex, the
ballot
> would not be financially feasable.
>
> An example of what a committee member does.
>
> One year I was the committee member who was tasked with combining and
> consolidating enhancements/requests HP had dumped from its STARS
database.
> Others on the SIC were tasked with researching requests which had been
> submitted to the Interex office.
>
> There were over 800 requests on the floppy disc I received.  For the
first
> couple of weeks it seemed like it was going to be an endless task,
reading
> the requests, trying to find similar requests, grouping the similar
> requests together, finding duplicate requests (the same technical feature
> desired, but written by a different author and stated differently),
> counting the duplicates and assigning weights to them (as in there were
9?
> 13? 19? 29? requests for adding an the "RUN" command to the COMMAND
> intrinsic), and coming up with an analysis for the SIC to review.  I
spent
> hours on it every day for a number of weeks, after all, there are
> publication deadlines, and to reduce costs the materials have to be ready
> in certain time intervals.
>
> I also made many, many long distance calls.  Almost all of those calls I
> paid for out of my own pocket so the cost to Interex shown on its ledger
> doesn't truely reflect the cost of that ballot.  This is fairly typical.
> Volunteers provide a very significant service to Interex and the whole HP
> community.  They have my sincere appreciation for their efforts, and my
> understanding and sympathy for the family time and activities they give
up
> and time from work they miss while providing servies to the HP community.
>
> It is my understanding that today requests are first processed by the
SIGs.
>  Each of the SIGs then come up with the top requests for their SIG, and
> forward their portion of the ballot to whatever has replaced the SIC.
The
> completed SIB is then printed, stuffed in envelopes, mailed to the
> membership, and the votes tallied by the Interex staff.  It still costs
> money, and since not all Interex members have email and/or web access,
the
> ballot is still mailed out to the membership, and still tallied at the
> Interex office (Tony, if I have this process wrong, please correct me).
>
> So, in my opinion, in consideration of the efforts Interex devotes to the
> production of the SIB, both financially and through its volunteers, I
think
> it is fair to say that voting on the SIB ballot is, and should continue
to
> be, a privilege of Interex membership.
>
> John  (putting flame suit on)
>
> PS:  In the past a lot of the requests for ballot items came from IPROF
> submissions or (what is now) HPWORLD submissions.  I'm not sure if that
is
> still the case, perhaps Tony or some SIG leaders could enlighten me.
>
> At 5/12/99 08:54 AM , John Dunlop wrote:
> >Tony , you wrote:
> >[snip]
> >> This is a very imperfect analogy, but please bear with it.
> >> Let's assume that you are a stockholder in a company that pays an
annual
> >> dividend to its stockholders. Let's assume also, that the company is
in the
> >> business of trying to, make life better for a whole load of people,
some of
> >> whome are stockholders, and most of whom are not. Somehow this company
> >> makes enough money to distribute the dividend I talked about earlier.
> >>
> >> How would you feel if all of a sudden people began to say that the
dividend
> >> should now be offered to everyone regardless. Doesn't that pretty well
> >> destroy the value of your investment?
> >
> >Sorry, you have lost me here. Yes, a very imperfect analogy.
> >The HP3000 User Community is just that and Interex has no monopoly on
> >who uses HP3000s.
> >However, the SIB is a ballot for the improvement of the HP3000 for all
> >HP3000 users, not just those who "join the club".
> >
> >> Interex develops mechanisms to help improve the lot of the entire HP
> >> community (especially the HP3000 community, but that is largely due to
the
> >> historical nature of the Interex/HP relationship). Along the way it
offers
> >> special benefits to membership. AMong these is the right to vote on
the
> >> System Improvement Ballot. This right is reserved only to members.
Anyone
> >> can participate in SIG discussions and SIG surveys and many of the
other
> >> opportunities for discourse. But the right to vote is reserved
exclusively
> >> tio Interex members.
> >
> >This is just my point. This "privilege" to vote on the SIB shouldn't be
> >just limited to Interex members.
> >
> >> If someone values that right, the way to acquire it is simple. People
who
> >> choose NOT to acquire that right have made a (presumptively) valid
judgment
> >> on the value of such a right. What you are proposing is tantamount to
> >> having your neighbours cake and eating it too! Such behavior leads to
tooth
> >> decay - and worse (;-)
> >
> >Really, Tony. You are taking things rather too far. All I am asking is
> >that all HP3000 users and not just the "Interex Club" get to have a vote
> >on the improvement of the HP3000. Why should it be an elitist vote?
> >
> >> I have been a vocal defender of the concept that survey participation
> >> should be as wide open as possible, to get the best possible debate;
but
> >> that voting should be reserved to those who choose to earn the right,
by
> >> becoming members.
> >
> >Um, that seems rather a contradiction.
> >
> >I have been a member of Interex for many years and I also participated
> >in the first SIB for MPE and even typed up the technical issues on the
> >Interex HP150! So I am aware of both sides of the question but I still
> >would like to see a wider input to the SIB.
> >
> >'nuff said.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >John Dunlop
> >
> >E-mail : [log in to unmask]
> >Web : http://www.hp3000links.com
> >"All your HP3000 resources on the Net"
> >Mirror: http://homepages.tcp.co.uk/~jdunlop
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> John Korb                            email: [log in to unmask]
> Innovative Software Solutions, Inc.
>
> The thoughts, comments, and opinions expressed herein are mine
> and do not reflect those of my employer(s), or anyone else.