Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!rex!uflorida!gatech!ncar!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!willett!ForthNet From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Feedback to the Forth Interest Group Message-ID: <2396.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us> Date: 21 Feb 91 23:30:33 GMT Organization: (n.) to be organized. But that's not important right now. Lines: 85 Category 1, Topic 2 Message 108 Sat Feb 23, 1991 F.SERGEANT [Frank] at 15:25 CST Volunteers . While we are on this subject of FIG, I have a few more comments. . Beggars can't be choosers, as the old saying goes. I am not demanding that FIG do anything in particular. I want to emphasize this in case my suggestions about correcting a chapter listing in FD have been misunderstood by anyone. . I think we need to accept what the FIG volunteers do and be grateful for it. If we want it done but aren't willing to do it ourselves I don't see how we have any right to demand that someone else volunteer to do it. Further, what is done is probably done out of a good heart and partly for the joy of associating with and good will toward our fellow Forth enthusiasts. Surely by heavy criticism of volunteers we do not increase their willingness to contribute. Take me, for example. I'm happy to have people use Pygmy, but what if someone were to DEMAND that I add this feature, make that change, show him how to solve a problem. I'd probably laugh the first few times with "**** you, you're lucky I do anything at all." If it continued, I might turn bitter. (Oh, you thought I was already bitter? No, no.) Indeed, it is the occasional thank you or hint of appreciation that keeps me going. . This appreciation for what the volunteers do, however, does not completely prevent us from gently pointing out in each other what we perceive to be errors in logic, fact, viewpoint, (or parentage?). But such errors, and criticism of those errors, shouldn't overshadow the good will. . Merely as a matter of opinion: I would prefer to have Jax raising hell and criticizing FIG and doing *anything* as chapter co-ordinator rather than have no chapter co-ordinator. I do not dispute the board's right to fire Jax. I wish wish wish I'd signed Jax's petition for nomination. I didn't "bother" as I was sure he'd get plenty of signatures. (I bet there were 24 other people who felt the same way.) . On the other hand, I think Dennis is on very shaky ground when he claims to have given Jax a hearing WITHOUT THE NEED FOR JAX BEING PRESENT! Dennis, say the board is not required to give him a hearing! Say the board merely exercised its executive authority to dismiss an employee or officer! But, by the very definition of HEARING, never mind the long tradition in English and U.S. law of allowing an accused to hear the charges and evidence and face his accusers, it is clear to me that a "hearing" Jax wished to be present at was at *best* a SHAM if Jax was not allowed to attend! (Am I in Alice's wonderland again or does anyone agree with me?) . While I regret the lack of a chapter co-ordinator, I am very happy with other aspects of FIG: I really, really, really liked FORML (sponsored by FIG). FORML alone *may* compensate for anything else I might not be happy about. I liked it so much that I am considering attending Rochester (in spite of serious reservations about whether I can afford it). Also, I'm very glad the FIG sponsored Forth roundtable is available on GEnie. I'm glad to hear FIG is reaching out through bookstore(s) with FD. I'm glad publications are available through FIG. I'm glad FD is such a pretty magazine (but, maybe it is too pretty if dues have to be raised to keep the slick cover on it!). . When Jax says that FIG's finances are expletive overstruck and Dennis says that is completely false and Jax says the 33-1/3% dues hike proves he was correct, I feel the weight of logic is on Jax's side. . When Dennis says he's not concerned about the fall in membership and that the ones remaining are happy and enthusiastic, I have to agree that Dennis is correct. I rather wish he was concerned, though, but that's just my own opinion. (The ones who weren't happy enough or enthusiastic enough voted with their feet, so now we remaining happy enthusiastics pay higher dues.) If I attended FORML and may attend Rochester, how can I worry about dues increasing by a third? And, let's face it, FIG gets that magazine out like clockwork. It must not be an easy task, witness sigFORTH's publication and all of Jax's complaints about JFAR being late. And, as far as office administration goes, the sigFORTH non-ACM fee is $33/year, but if you are not *real* careful they will try to charge you $42/year. And, the people in the ACM office may well be on salary (a weak point here, I admit). . And last, I am in complete disagreement with Jax suggesting it is OK for FIG to borrow money. Neither a borrower ... be! I'm glad to hear the board is not considering that a wise course. . -- Frank ----- This message came from GEnie via willett. You *cannot* reply to the author using e-mail. Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.). Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwp