[RFU] Re: [Imc-production] Re: [UCIMC-Tech] production room cleanup > Re: RFU Public Files

[dan blah]

Some of this has already happened.  I can't find the notes so it's
only as good as my word and any of those others who were present...
IIRC, some time ago I brought a proposal to Steering to rename the
video group to the production group.  The only active members in this
group until recently have been Danielle, Josh and I.  Recently, Tommy
has spearheaded and done a *ton* of work to get things moving.  Point
is, IIRC, the group has actually existed for some time when some time
ago I brought the dormant Video group back alive by unlocking the list
and renaming it the Production group after an approved proposal from
Steering... some time ago IIRC.  This was done sometime before we
purchased the new production machine and set up the other workstations
in there.

Anyone else remember this?  Either way, the below proposal sounds good
to me except it would be *best* IMO if what is or what will be the
Production group could meet before Steering to bring a mutually agreed
upon by all concerned members proposal to Steering.

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 9:20 PM, Danielle Chynoweth <chyn at ojctech.com> wrote:
> Here's a proposal:
>
> Let's convene at IMC Steering Group meeting to discuss the use of the
> Production Room.  I propose Thursday, May 1st at 8 PM.
>
> We would discuss:
> - The formation of a working group called the Production Group.
>  - WRFU usage of the Production Room and how the IMC can support WRFU
> meeting its needs.
> - Security & access issues.
> - Ways the production group can help support the building like other groups
> do.
>
> In the meantime, there are plans to clean up the production room this
> Saturday - those should go forward without removing any WRFU equipment.
>
> Here's some historical information:
>
> No working group "owns" any particular space in the IMC in any way.  The
> Steering Group, made up of all groups, manages space allocation and provides
> groups with space based on their needs.  Groups pay into the building fund
> based on their ability to contribute - this is not rent and the relationship
> is not one of tenancy.
>
> No group called the "Production Group" exists, although there is a listserv
> for key access to the Production Room space.  That said, the IMC has a rich
> history of producing radio and video - and used to have active working
> groups for both.  The IMC is sorely in need of a production group to manage
> production activities and welcome public involvement.
>
> The radio group waned and funds for radio equipment that it managed were
> transferred to management by WRFU as long as the funds went for media
> production equipment.  The video group has been on hiatus for almost 3
> years, although some folks produce video for UPTV in the production room
> from time to time.
>
> For a working group to exist it must:
> - Get approval from the Steering Group to be a working group.
> - Consense on two empowered spokes to represent it at Steering and have
> those spokes show up.
> - Manage a listserv which anyone can join.
>  - Be open to the public and hold public meetings.
> - Post the notes of its meeting to its listserv and imc at ucimc.org.
> - Use consensus in its decision making.
>
> I applaud that there is finally interest in taking care of the production
> room.  Yea!  I have personally cleaned it up 3 times in 3 years and it
> always gets trashed and filled with junk - which is what happens with space
> when no group is assigned as a caretaker.
>
> cheers,
>
> - Danielle
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Andrew Ó Baoill <andrew at funferal.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Chris,
> >
> > Thanks for volunteering. As a fellow volunteer I appreciate your
> contribution to our operations.
> >
> > I think you misunderstand my comments about the 'production group' - it's
> not that it has been dormant, it's that there hasn't previously been a
> production working group. Creating a list to manage code access to the room
> isn't the same as having a working group that has rights and
> responsibilities within the IMC structure. I can find no record of a
> production group being recognized by Steering (or of such a proposal being
> made), a necessary step for it to be vested with power over access to IMC
> resources. This may appear pedantic - but a transparent structure and
> process is necessary for participation to be properly fostered. Creation of
> an informal group can perhaps occur by fiat, but creation of a group
> claiming ownership/stewardship of IMC resources (particularly resources as
> central as our audio and video production) *must* occur in an open and
> inclusive manner.
> >
> > In a related vein, I agree with your calls for consensus - my concerns are
> in part that recent steering meetings have not been announced to the IMC
> list (as required by our structure document) and this and other issues mean
> that participation is not being facilitated and encouraged in a manner
> consistent with our mission or necessary for a healthy IMC community.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> > On Apr 21, 2008, at 7:53 PM, Chris Ritzo wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I'd like it known that I came forward to suggest working on the
> production workstation, and the production room, to make good on a
> commitment I made in the tech group meeting a couple months ago to work on
> the production workstation since Dan and Josh's duties have piled up.
> Tommy, Dan and others in the shows and tech groups have spearheaded this
> long before me, so I'm glad you guys spoke up.  My suggestion to move things
> in or out of that space was to make room in there to work on this project.
> > >
> > > I've only been involved as a volunteer and IMC member for 6-8 months,
> but one thing I've learned is that no single person makes decisions about
> the space. And just because a group is inactive doesn't negate its existence
> or mean that it's been made up. This is a democratically run organization
> after all, and we need to come to consensus.
> > >
> > > Before I joined the tech group last fall it was Dan and Josh. If
> requests seem to be taking time, consider that we're all volunteers here and
> for active members how quickly tasks/requests can pile up.
> > > I'm not saying this to back out of helping on this project, or to
> counter your concerns Andrew, but to ask that you give the process a chance
> and bring the concerns to the appropriate groups to start the discussion.
> Dan's suggestion of reviving the production group is the right way to go,
> and all the interested members from other groups should join the list and
> make the Wed. meeting.  We all believe in the mission of the IMC enough to
> donate our time, money, and creativity, and in that sense we're all on the
> same side of this.
> > >
> > > Hope to see you Wednesday.
> > >
> > > -Chris
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Imc-production mailing list
> > Imc-production at lists.chambana.net
> > http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc-production
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>  RFU mailing list
>  RFU at lists.chambana.net
>  http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/rfu
>
>