Posted by Russell Watt in Question for the Candidates - Matt and D

Posted by Matthew Bernardin in Question for the Candidates - Matt and D

Posted by Philip Graham in Question for the Candidates - Matt and D
Posted by… suppressed (5) by the Post Ghost! 👻
Hi Matt,

I have a question about this one sentence you wrote, when describing your governmental audit:

However, first to be audited are some of the legacy positions, such as Librarian, Dockmaster, GM Archivist. These positions have been around since EffWebb and will almost certainly be fully deprecated in Exodus.

Speaking as a long time EDept member, and EDir I would like to also point that Dockmaster hasnt been used recently, but it does get used sometimes! The main uses these days is when we have new specs, ships, names/registery changes. Their duties then get assigned to poll the trove of canon registry lists and names with those we make for our ship specs, to ensure we don’t potentially infringe upon copyright. While this duty can also be given to the AEdir there are times that due to workload say with submissions, or discussions that isnt feasible. So while this is an ‘optional’ and legacy position overall it is something that occasionally does need to get filled for a time. Yes the Edir can delegate to anyone wishing to do that work too but since many people like titles, and feelings of responsibility I dont see it as something needing to be cut given how little use it gets. And case in point given that Discovery is now out, and we have had some new specs made in the past two terms, and ship changes too an audit to ensure compliance of the aforementioned list wouldn’t be unheard of for next term.

I cannot speak to the Dockmaster or the GM Archivist, because I don’t have a good sense of what they do. But I’m very familiar with what the Librarian does, because I am the Librarian. And, as the project lead for Exodus, I know what exactly the capabilities of our new system are going to be. Given both of those perspectives, I find this statement to be highly perplexing.

You know for a fact that I wrote a new Library capability for Exodus; you’re one of the few people who actually cared enough to use it at any point during testing. Why do you think that the position of Librarian would suddenly become redundant and “fully deprecated?” I mean, why do you think I wrote a Library app if I thought there should be no Librarian? Why would we want to get rid of a Librarian?

I mean, yes, the new system makes things vastly easier; you no longer have to know DocBook XML and be capable of running XSL Transforms on your computer to be Librarian. But, we’re still going to have a centralized collection of content, right? And it makes sense to have a person responsible for administering that, right? And there is non-technical work associated with that, like checking things for accuracy, spelling mistakes, copyright issues, etc. If we don’t have a Librarian, who will be responsible for doing that work? Or do you imagine we’ll simply stop doing that work and do some other work? If so, what?

Could you maybe outline your thinking here a bit more explicitly?

Joe

Ok, so this is one of the let’s have this conversation with TECH and the departments to determine both feasability and desirability of implimentation. But how it worked in my head and the idea i wanted to discuss in depth is A. the Librarian position per say would role into TECH’s general resposnsibilities. TECH upkeeps the infrastructure and the Library is now direct infrastructure. As for the librarians duties with regards to content I was envisonaging an arrangement where TECH would perhaps setup books and the individual departments would have direct content control themselves. IE Edept would be able to maintain their own specs and technology articles. Or perhaps an expansion to the library’s permissions to enable access control. There are a few different ways to go about this persuant to that audit.

But at no point am I discussing, pitching or even contemplating just axing stuff and letting it fester.

– Matt

So like Joe my question is why do you believe the dockmaster requires possible elimination?

Robert Archer

Actually Rob you are wrong. The purpose of the dockmaster has always been the webmaster of Edept. (https://www.star-fleet.com/ed/ ) What you are referring to is the department of registries which was like dock master folded into the EDept.

Dock master was a relevant position during EffWebb when it was necessary to have specific html expertise and server access to both markup and upload specs to be displayed in the pre-docbook technical manual. The rationale being to keep server access limited to a set group. One of the reasons Larry usually held the dock masters position. Then it was migrated to docbook and will now be in the exodus managed dynamic library which requires neither html expertise or server access to administer further invalidating this role.

Furthermore edept at best has sporadic spurts of busy periods. Last term edept reviewed a single spec? While this won’t always be the case Edept has or had a pool of non staff reviewers to deal with reviews. If Edept truly requires someone to keep track of the registry numbers I would as part of the audit direct and assist my edir to utilise Google spreadsheets and forms to fill this need.

– Matt

My question is, what is the end game purpose of removing these positions? How are these positions detrimental to the club and the department? This also sounds as though you want to restrict the decision making ability of your staff, if your Edir wants to maintain a position why would that be a issue.

• philip

Philip if I asked a group of people to stand on a patch of grass facing the road I’ve restricted their ability to make decisions. In another post I said about setting out my expectations for the term and my expectation is to operate in as people efficient a way as is effective.

As for why this would be an issue well it shouldn’t be. As I said earlier this would be undertaken in an audit where both the department myself and TECH get to state their opinions on a change. I think we’ve been too focused on edept in this.

Joe brought up the concern about needing a librarian to QA all incoming documents whereas I was thinking about it from a different perspective. That is a valid point for keeping the role. And in terms of the dockmaster should something I didn’t consider equally as valid be presented it will be acknowledged and discussed.

This is an audit of people’s time as volunteers Vs usefulness to the club. We might find edept needs a thingamajigit instead of a dock master to be more effective e and transform the role instead.

But that’s what I see my job as president as, both initiator and guide of the conversation.

– Matt

So, Matt, you and D are basically saying, STF has evolved as a club, the software we use has also evolved, but the

My apologies all, my phone decided mid thought and mid post was an opportune time to post my question. Apologies for my phone, and I’ll try again, on a desktop this time.

So, Matt, you and D are basically saying, STF has evolved as a club, the software we use has also evolved, but the requirements of the legislation/how we meet those requirements in parts of the club haven’t evolved, and you want to find out where this evolution hasn’t taken place, and do what you can to ensure volunteers are being used in the best way possible? Am I correct in those thoughts?

Thank you,
Russell