[Sigia-l] The Menace

[Derek R]

jz wrote:
>| ...if IAs do get paid more (in salary, from royalties,
>| from consulting fees, whatever) as an indirect 
>| outcome of AIfIA's activities...

It is precisely my belief that AIfIA would love to dance-in and take
credit for everything-under-the-sun-IA. This is the goal of their
organization, isn't it? To take credit as the mover-'n'-shaker without
which we would all be lost-little-lambs with no direction? I don't think
so.


A wrote:
> Don't feed the trolls, man.

Statements like this are nothing more than a clique-protection
technique. I have seen them before. You could also accuse one of
'flaming' in an attempt to dodge issues presented. Both are cowardly --
and the issues remain unconsidered.

Here's a tip: Why don't you try changing the subject and/or creating or
publicizing distractions? That sometimes works.  Or try to wax indignant
(also known as the 'how dare you?' gambit) -- oh, you guys already
implemented those particular truth-suppression techniques!


A wrote:
> any real, working person over the age of 16 knows
> what kind of effort and sacrifice are required to 
> launch and sustain. . .

Actually, I think any 16-year old with some familiarity with WYSIWYG
HTML editors could have thrown the AIfIA site together in a day,
all-by-their-lonesome.  The AIfIA creators certainly didn't spend any
time on the copy, or the press release -- where they could have
solicited this list, or others, for a good copy-writer. Yes, as I have
mentioned before, they certainly didn't consult anyone.

Therefore, the poor design, bad copy etc. along with the 'effort and
sacrifice' belong *solely* to the AIfIA Board and Leadership Council.
This is my point of contention. Why didn't they share/disclose in an
effort to bring the best of everybody to the table?

Answer: It is my impression it would have been
over-the-founders-dead-bodies for anyone else to contribute. All the
glory has been pre-reserved for them alone (for a reason -- they don't
share) with no room for the likes of you and me. If the founders weren't
such greed-heads, why would they stole-away and plot in secret corners?
Again, simply because they wanted all the credit, just like *they will
take* all-the-credit for everything-IA -- that is, if you roll-over and
let them. Precedents don't lie.


CW wrote:
> collaborative efforts are more powerful than individual

Yes, Christina. I believe you started this organization to harness and
expand the power and influence of your clique. You certainly can't
*convincingly* indicate how keen you are on collaboration with people
who are not immediate members of your clique, since *that never
happened,* and now that you've gone ahead without collaboration and
launched yourself as President, it's a little too late to be talking
about how collaborative you are. Don't you think?

> Some folks take potshots in hopes of making a name

Yes, Christina. I -- Derek Rogerson -- I am the one who uses a signature
at the end of every post I make.

[Aside:  Maybe I should start spamming all the lists I post to with a
signature which includes my home phone, fax number, home and business
address, links to my latest blogs entries, my spouses phone numbers, the
phone number of my barber, a 14-line quote, musings on my favorite
color, my pager number, my ICQ address, my IM handle, my alternate email
address, privacy disclaimers, etc etc etc... For instance, do people
really believe someone is going to run to the archaic fax machine and
fax Willy-Nilly over in the UK as soon as they receive their email
through a list already designed to communicate? Let's at least try to be
professional -and- relevant, yes?]

> those folks may make a name they have to change later

Is that a threat Christina? 


Karl wrote:
> I tried to respond with answers to specific concerns,
> and respond with questions of my own. Derek raises
> some important questions. However, his style left me
> a little shocked. 

Well, I'm American. Sorry to shock you with forward style. Nevertheless,
Karl, you are the only person who genuinely attempted to explain
themselves and address the questions and concerns I raised. You appear
both honest and responsive.

However, one can note (observably) that 'Prez' Christina and her other
'friends' (the clique) make use of truth-suppression techniques
(ineffectively, I might add) and haven't addressed a single concern I
have raised -- instead -- using the opportunity to push their personal
agenda (AIfIA) and to try and convince us of how genuine and sincere
they are -- and -- solicited us for money yet again! What a surprise! My
guess is they will continue to skirt concerns I have directly raised,
perhaps issue more *personal threats,* and keep running away. For shame.


Chris wrote:
> leave it to you to turn the best joke

what joke?

> into a pissing/moaning/gnashing of teeth contest

I'm not doing any of the above. I'm trying to get a response from a
clique which relays solely on 'bump and run' techniques. Will they ever
respond to direct and valid questions addressed to them?


George wrote:
> if you see many of the same faces appearing
> prominently in this community, it's because they're
> the folks who are both passionate _and_ willing
> to get involved

How does one get involved in a secret operation, George? Nobody knew
anything about this organization until there could be no doubt about
*who* built it, *who* owns it, and *who* runs it -- so that nobody could
share in the glory of creation except members-of-the-clique.

> I know my involvement with WSP probably hurt
> my career as much as helping it because of
> missed opportunities I didn't have time to pursue

Please. Can we dispense with the bull? Unemployment is at 7% in Silicon
Valley. So let's drop the bleeding heart
I-almost-lost-my-job-to-make-this-happen stuff. This organization
happened because of self-interest disguised (poorly) as a community
effort. (Some community effort which doesn't include the community!)

> Work to change it

I am working to change it, George. My work is to expose the
ill-conceived ideas of the founders, expose the founder's self-interest
and greed, expose the founder's hostile attitude towards the greater
community, and through these exposures educate the greater community on
how they've been had. 

> Actions speak far louder than words
> and talk is cheap

Again, George, one cannot join an action which is secretly withheld so
that the conspirers may stack-the-deck for later accolades (I made this!
No one else would help me! I'm great! I'm a pioneer!).

Why not engage in the action of collaboration and sharing, instead of
the action of taking-credit-for-everything and ensuring you get all the
credit by cutting-everyone-out at the beginning?

Nevertheless, the point remains that AIfIA intends to speak for the
whole IA community and its founders have some ill-conceived and
completely-wrong ideas which they are not interested in discussing in
any way at all.

That is elitism and manipulative. And, as I indicated, I am here with
valid complaints -- still -- and have heard no word, only mis-direction,
avoidance, and distraction.		 
	 
Selah.