<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi members,</p>
<p>This is for you, not Jonathan Fine. He's welcome to read it of
course. I'm pretty sure he will ignore it, or not understand it
(or both?), as he has in the past with similar analyses I have
sent him privately. I'm writing this like a newspaper article,
not an academic paper, so I don't expect most readers to get past
paragraph 3. If you are interested in what the committee work has
been like recently, and why I have chosen to have informal
discussions with some committee members before discussing on
committee, read on. I rather think some members would rather like
to ignore the committee internals, and leave running UKTUG to the
committee. That's their right. And I'd welcome them to continue
doing so. But, the committee internals have surfaced because
UKTUG cannot continue as it has been. Earlier committees have
struggled to prevent the decline of UKTUG, and considered
dissolution as a managed way to put a stop to the significant
effort required to keep UKTUG going without a correspondingly
valuable benefit for members and the TeX community. In 2019 we
discussed dissolution. In 2020 we passed motions about it. In 2021
I've told you that UKTUG has failed. It's not bankrupt. But it has
no plan for succession, no prospect of a future committee. (Prove
me wrong! Please ask to be co-opted onto the committee now; (you
have not offered in the past when I have made similar
requests)). It is plain to me that a committee with Jonathan Fine
on it is even less effective than ones without him. Some members
refuse to serve on a committee with Jonathan Fine on it, having
experienced his behaviour. I did not find the energy and time
to change the committee rules so you (the members) could vote on
who is allowed on the committee. At the moment committee accepts
all volunteers. That may have been an error on my part.</p>
<p>Jonathan Fine interprets my behaviour as forming a sub-committee,
and then criticises me for not conforming to the rules that apply
to sub-committees. I haven't formed a sub-committee, and thus it's
not recorded in the minute book. He also says that he feels he's
being shunned for contradicting an orthodoxy; What orthodoxy? I
rather think it's his earlier explanation, that I limit
interacting with him. Well, that's politics, not disrespect.
And yes my respect goes to both Jonathan Fine, and UKTUG. I
believe that JF's mental model is that he believes he is doing the
best for UKTUG and the TeX community by following his own
particular (self-aggrandizing) path, no matter what the cost to
others. In that sense his disruptive behaviour is honest. But I'm
not prepared to bear the cost of JF's personal path and choices.
There's no give-and-take with JF as I experience him.<br>
</p>
<p>There's usually small 'p' politics in committees. Most of you
will already understand that politics involves <b>goal setting,
infighting, negotiation, co-operation</b>. And that
goal-setting takes place outside formal structures before it
enters the formal ones. Jonathan Fine either does not understand
politics the way I do, or believes he can bully me (and the
committee) into doing things his way. This is a sorry state of
affairs, and the underlying interactions have contributed to the
poor outcomes from the committee in the last 9 or so months. I've
been doing my best for you under what I feel are trying
circumstances.</p>
<p>I have learned, painfully, that the only aspect of politics
Jonathan does with committee is the infighting bit*. A political
process such as UKTUG committee needs all the aspects I
describe. Chairing UKTUG is a voluntary activity. I contribute
what I can. Which is not as much as UKTUG needs. I regret that
much of my time is taken up with unproductive infighting.</p>
<p>As chair I have no power. Zilch. I suggested the committee adopt
the charity commission's notion of etiquette. Or other rules of
behaviour. My suggestion found no favour. How then, to form a
plan, and enact it? Move the constructive parts of the process
out of JF's reach so he can't disrupt e.g. the brainstorming, the
what if's, the scenario planning. And that's why the A_list
discusses without JF. If he won't contribute, at least I have
avoided his entirely disrupting the constructive members of
committee.</p>
<p>I have to be careful that the informal discussions do not
directly give rise to formal committee actions. The secretary
acts for the committee on small matters. And negotiations from a
committee member are quite acceptable as long as the binding
agreement (if any) is made by the committee. We have had to have
in-committee discussions of grants. <br>
</p>
<p>I make no apology for my approach to committee matters. Rather I
seek your sympathy and praise -- well, actually I don't need
them, because I'm not standing as chair again, whether UKTUG
continues or not.</p>
<p>Jay Hammond</p>
<p>* scrupulous honesty requires an 'almost' here. Just sometimes
JF's questions about and interpretations of the constitution can
be helpful. But his helpful interventions are such a small
fraction of the overall output that they do not compensate for the
disruption. Nowhere near.</p>
<p>jh<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 06/10/2021 16:03, Jonathan Fine
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CALD=Yf9B2anAxgP7EiX5L5BYmDf0-CCMco3T2tL9WUL=toHmzA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">Hi
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Summary: Yesterday Jay (Chair of UK TUG) told us that the
was a previously hidden sub-committee. I explain this, and its
consequences. I express sadness and apologise for any
contribution I may have made to the present painful situation.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I thank Jay for his post yesterday, which answers a
question that I didn't dare ask. For much of this year I've
suspected that there was an unofficial sub-committee, which
I didn't know about, that discussed and perhaps decided
business before it went to the main committee.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Yesterday Jay wrote: [M]ost of the current committee is
saying little in its actual meetings until its mind is made
up. [THE] REAL DISCUSSION IS TAKING PLACE ELSEWHERE.
[Emphasis added.]</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Here's an example of how this works in practice.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>1. Jay, presumably after a meeting of the sub-committee,
tells you that the majority opinion of the committee is that
there be an SGM "where we expect you to vote for
dissolution".</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>2. I'm not aware of the sub-committee. I tell you, fairly
and accurately I hope: "Please regard Jay's statement as an
expression of his personal opinion. It does not, in my
opinion, fairly and accurately reflect committee discussion
and votes."<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>3. Jay writes: "I wrote to you presenting the majority
view of the members of the UK-TUG committee with regard to
dissolution. I regret that Jonathan Fine is contradicting
me."</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>4. I wonder by what mechanism Jay knows the majority view
when I do not. I say nothing more on this matter, until
today.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The constitution allows the committee to delegate its
powers or functions to a subcommittee. It further states:
"The terms of any such delegation must be recorded in the
minute book."</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The constitution also states: "All acts and proceedings
of any subcommittees must be fully and promptly reported to
the Committee."</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Jay and the other committee members may regard their
conduct as a proper exclusion or avoidance of a disruptive,
uncooperative and awkward fellow committee members. I regard
it as ostracism or social-shunning, for contradicting an
orthodoxy.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This whole matter is painful and saddens me greatly. I
believe UK TUG in life and death deserves more dignity and
respect that it presently gets. I sincerely apologise to you
all for any actions or words of mine that have contributed
to the present situation.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>with kind regards</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Jonathan</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Email use <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jay@jjnr.uk">jay@jjnr.uk</a></pre>
</body>
</html>