[occupyaustin-it] occupyaustin-it Digest, Vol 2, Issue 66

Mon Nov 21 12:40:45 CST 2011

I would like to go to the web team meeting. I'd like to discuss a few 
things that can be done to increase site accessibility, as well as some 
site organizational thoughts I've had.

I'm also very close to having an embedded chat solution that can be 
deployed on the website, used to replace Livestream chat, etc. It is 
XMPP-based, so works equally well from the web/desktop/phone clients. 
See an example here:

http://occupyatxtogether.org/chat/

No guarantees that it looks nice, I just deployed the tech. If we have 
access to the occupyaustin.org domain, we can add the necessary SRV 
records to migrate this off of my server and onto the 
jabber.freenetworkfoundation.org server. I'm hosting it locally just to 
get something up and operational, but I'd really like it if it was 
occupyaustin.org-branded.

All that is to say that I'd be going to the web team meeting as an 
individual. Is anyone willing to meet up with me at the GA tomorrow?

On 11/21/2011 12:28 PM, Gregory Foster wrote:
> Late last night, I wrote Anton directly to apologize for how things 
> have gone.  The concern about transparency and accountability has been 
> addressed by Joe's access to the OA.org CPanel.  That is sufficient 
> progress on this thread to regard the issue as closed.
>
> At this time, it is clear that IT assistance is not desired by the web 
> team, and the waters have been muddied between the teams.  It will 
> take time for that to clear.  The separation of responsibilities 
> between the teams has been communicated to the GA, and will be 
> re-iterated as needed.
>
> In keeping with our verbal commitment to begin engaging OA committees 
> directly to hear out their needs and concerns, I will be attending 
> Tuesday's web team meeting.  I am going in the spirit of peaceful 
> listening, to learn how the web team organizes itself and gain direct 
> perspective.  While I am not going to discourage anyone else from 
> attending, per Anton's request it should be as an individual 
> interested in learning about the web team.  If you are available 
> Tuesday night, my suggestion would be to go with the group headed to 
> the ATX Hackerspace to begin work on a new iteration of the 
> FreedomTower.  More than enough energy has been diverted on this 
> thread already, and it's best if everyone get back to constructive 
> endeavors.
>
> I apologize to the IT team for my role in exacerbating this 
> situation.  In the end, I think everything has worked out fine: 
> concerns have been heard and addressed, and there can be no doubts 
> about where everyone stands.
>
> Let's get back to work, and more importantly to the atmosphere of fun 
> creativity that has pervaded the IT team throughout the occupation.  
> Can someone take pictures at the Hackerspace on Tuesday?  Looking 
> forward to seeing what y'all are able to accomplish :)
>
> Onward.
> gf
>
>
> On 11/21/11 10:38 AM, Alan Viosca wrote:
>> I'm with Nolan. Seems like what likely started as a small 
>> disagreement has gotten entirely out of hand.
>>
>> In short, it seems like some IT group people have problems with the 
>> security of the website, which is primarily why the IT group wants to 
>> be involved (or have some say) with the web side of things. I have no 
>> opinion on whether or not the web group and IT team should be 
>> independent groups; however, it seems the groups need to be working 
>> together more efficiently than they have been.
>>
>> I know some IT people are going to try and go to the Web Team meetup 
>> on Tuesday. I would like to see some Web folks come to an IT meetup 
>> as well. Anton, would you be willing to come to our meeting on 
>> Wednesday so we can hopefully get all of this cleared up?
>>
>> Our handling of this issue thus far has been childish. Let's stop all 
>> of that here and proceed in a rational manner.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Nolan Darilek 
>> <nolan at thewordnerd.info <mailto:nolan at thewordnerd.info>> wrote:
>>
>>     I'm going to chime in and hopefully say something that we can all
>>     agree with. Stunning, I know.
>>
>>     But I don't like some of what I've seen from just about every
>>     more recent participant of this thread. What I've seen in the
>>     last 12 hours or so is not the IT group I signed on to, and is
>>     probably exactly what the authorities cracking down on our
>>     movements throughout the nation *want* to see in our groups.
>>
>>     One email made it sound like 5-6 magnets met and agreed on
>>     something. I'm not sure if I was included in that number and what
>>     it is thought that I agree on, but here's what I want out of this:
>>
>>     1. I don't care whether we subsume the web group or whether it
>>     continues individually. Not at all.
>>
>>     2. I'd really hate to see us lose occupyaustin.org
>>     <http://occupyaustin.org> or to split efforts. That's where
>>     people will go when they want information, and it'd be a huge PR
>>     loss for that to go away.
>>
>>     3. I think that absence and control are highly relevant. I don't
>>     anticipate being absent, but what if I own some critical piece of
>>     infrastructure, we code the URL into apps and such, then I get
>>     hit by a car or a cop and end up seriously injured? As someone
>>     who ends up in the ER regularly due to a dislocated shoulder, I'm
>>     very conscious of how things can go from great to suck in
>>     seconds. Fortunately, for me, my brand of suck just costs $4000
>>     and a few hours of my life, plus lots of stress. What if, gods
>>     forbid, that suck involves dying and losing our domain name? I'm
>>     not trying to downplay dying itself, but when steps are taken
>>     that cause others to count on us, we have to think about these
>>     things.
>>
>>     I'm working on an app that has to be HIPAA/HITECH-compliant. One
>>     of the steps I'm taking is encrypting the database such that a
>>     password gets entered on app startup. When this gets deployed,
>>     I'm burning the password to CD and placing it in a safety deposit
>>     box whose key I'll be providing to a trusted party. The idea is
>>     that if I'm ever seriously incapacitated, the business must
>>     continue. This is what I, and perhaps others, want to see from
>>     the web team. We want to know, among other things, that our web
>>     presence won't be lost, cracked or otherwise compromised.
>>
>>     I hope we can stop sniping at each other. Really felt like junior
>>     high all over again for a while. And yes, that applies to my own
>>     working group as well.
>>
> -- 
> Gregory Foster ||gfoster at entersection.org
> @gregoryfoster<>  http://entersection.com/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> occupyaustin-it mailing list
> occupyaustin-it at foojutsu.org
> http://foojutsu.org/mailman/listinfo/occupyaustin-it

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://foojutsu.org/pipermail/occupyaustin-it/attachments/20111121/5f255a81/attachment.html>