[UK-TUG] Formal notice of AGM

[Dr Nicola L C Talbot]

As mentioned in the minutes, at last year's AGM I raised the question: 
are we *UK*-TUG (emphasis on UK) or are we UK-*TUG* (emphasis on TeX)? 
I'd like to re-visit this point, and I think it's helpful to look back 
at the history of TeX and the digital evolution to evaluate this.

Knuth first released TeX in 1978 and Lamport first released LaTeX in 
1985. The World Wide Web (WWW) was invented in 1989 but it wasn't until 
1993 that HTML was first released. If I recall correctly, UK-TUG was 
created in 1990 (or thereabouts). At that time, there were no search 
engines, no blogs or similar that described how to use (La)TeX. No 
forums or Q&A sites. There was Usenet (primarily comp.text.tex for 
general (La)TeX questions), ftp for fetching remote resources, and 
email. There were also brick and mortar book stores where you could buy 
(or order) a copy of The TeXbook or the LaTeX user's guide & reference 
manual.

Back then, most people didn't have Internet access (so no Usenet, ftp or 
email). If they did, it was either through work or (rare) home computers 
with expensive dial-up. Travel to international TUG conferences was 
unlikely to be funded as a work expense, and, for most households, the 
cost of a transatlantic flight would only be considered as part of a 
family holiday (if that).

In that context, a regional group makes a lot of sense. It enabled 
members to meet up at national locations. Baskerville (the UK-TUG 
magazine) provided useful articles. Training days, provided in locations 
with good transport links, were a useful way for newcomers to learn how 
to get started.

As Jay Hammond mentioned in a previous email, there's very little about 
TeX that's specific to the UK. Non-English user groups have an 
additional benefit for their users in that members can communicate in 
their native language. For those who can't speak English, this is a 
significant advantage to using a translation tool. We don't have that issue.

The rapid advances in the digital world have largely made the original 
aims of UK-TUG redundant. Someone in the UK can post a question that may 
be answered by someone in the USA or Germany or Australia etc (although 
not necessarily immediately). Search engines can find plenty of articles 
or videos on how to use TeX and friends.

However, as was also pointed out at last year's AGM, the UK-TUG meetings 
aren't just about TeX. They are also social gatherings where we can get 
to meet fellow enthusiasts and have friendly chats over tea/coffee or 
pizza. There was an interest expressed in having more meetings that 
focused on this social aspect, regardless of whether or not UK-TUG 
continued to formally exist.

People are, by and large, sociable. Most like to form communities with 
shared interests, but there's an optimal size. If a community is too 
large it's easy for members to feel invisible.

By way of analogy, consider a person in a large cathedral parish 
compared with someone in a small rural church. The large parish has far 
better resources, but it's easy to be alone in the crowd. The small 
parish doesn't have the resources but it does have a stronger sense of 
community.

I therefore think that the main international TeX User Group (TUG) is 
better suited to fund TeX projects and promote TeX use globally, but 
local user groups, such as UK-TUG, are better suited at forming 
communities. UK-TUG isn't about the UK, it's about a group of TeX users 
who are mostly located in the UK.

There are TeX-related chat rooms around, such as on StackExchange, but 
they have their disadvantages: text-only conversations can lose a lot of 
the nuances of face-to-face communication (it's easy for 
misunderstandings to occur), and it can become very disorientating when 
there are multiple interleaved conversations. It's like walking into a 
room where there are a number of small groups all talking very loudly. 
The TeX.SE chat room also suffers from the fact that people visit it for 
different reasons. Some want to socialise while others view it more like 
a commercial online chat that exists solely to provide technical support.

Jonathan Fine mentioned in his motion about the increased use of Zoom 
for remote meetings. The pandemic has made remote meetings commonplace 
and far more acceptable. This seems a much better solution to the 
problem of chat rooms or (post-pandemic) of trying to reach a physical 
location that might be miles away from where you live.

I can give some examples of remote meetings that I know about. The 
Institute of Mathematics and its Applications (IMA) introduced "Virtual 
Maths Teas" this year, where each session provides a short informal 
opportunity to talk with other members about mathematical or 
professional topics. Some of the regional branch meetings have also 
taken place via Zoom this year.

Although I'm a member of the IMA, I haven't actually attended any of 
these meetings. There's no regional branch where I live so I've never 
met other members, and, not being naturally gregarious, that makes it a 
bit difficult joining in. If UK-TUG adopts similar virtual meetings, 
will UK-TUG members who've never been to any physical meetings feel 
likewise uncomfortable about joining in? If so, how do we encourage them?

Another example is the RISC OS User Group of London (ROUGOL) who meet 
monthly. As with the IMA regional branch meetings, this regular meeting 
was held at a physical location pre-pandemic and has this year switched 
to Zoom. I haven't technically "attended" any of these meetings, but my 
son attended the last one and the nature of virtual meetings means that 
it's difficult to not overhear it if you're in the next room. In this 
case the meeting started with a pre-arranged speaker, followed by Q&A 
and then informal off-topic chit-chat. The talk and Q&A (but not the 
chit-chat) was later put on YouTube.

I think this is a good format for encouraging introverted members to 
join in. It's much easier to attend a meeting to listen to someone 
rather than the more daunting challenge of turning up and trying to join 
a conversation. The Q&A helps to break the ice a bit, and the chit-chat 
then helps people to get to know each other.

In summary:

1. Regardless of whether or not UK-TUG folds, I'd like to see a 
continuation of the UK-TUG community (even if it's the "members of the 
former UK-TUG" community).

2. If UK-TUG does fold, I believe it's more appropriate for any funds 
leftover after paying outstanding debts to be given to other TeX 
organisations, such as TUG or DANTE (the German-speaking TeX user group 
who fund the Comprehensive TeX Archive Network, CTAN), rather than to 
UK-specific organisations who have a subset of members who use TeX. In 
the former case, the funds are more likely to go on TeX (projects or 
promotion). In the latter case, the funds may well end up being spent on 
non-TeX areas.

(If disclosures are required when recommending a target for UK-TUG 
funds, then here are mine: I'm also a member of TUG and I have a number 
of packages on CTAN.)

3. If UK-TUG doesn't fold, I believe that the constitution should be 
updated to allow for a remote AGM in the event of a pandemic, civil 
disturbances, or any other events outside of the committee's control 
that prevents members from attending (or simply to allow members who 
can't attend due to other factors, such as distance to the meeting 
place, illness or disability). Technology now exists to allow this that 
wasn't present when the constitution was first written.

Finally, I'd like to thank all committee members, past and present, for 
their efforts, particularly when juggling a heavy workload and serious 
illness. Having been on committees for other organisations in the past, 
I know this is hard work, especially where there is division.

Best regards
Nicola Talbot