Re: A story about how SVLUG (allegedly) got banned from Google

Quoting Daniel Gimpelevich (daniel-R/[email protected]):

> IIRC, the installfests moved out of Google well before Andrew's
> involvement....

Um....  I didn't _say_ this happened during Andrew's presidency, and in
fact it (obviously) did not.

The only mention of Andrew Fife in that posting was that I'd
deliberately steered clear of typically noxious SVLUG internal politics
until about the time of his presidency.

So, not a really good job of reading, Daniel.  Very not good, actually.

> ...and the venue change was preceded with a protracted period of
> impaired communication between SVLUG and then-Google liaison Leslie
> Hawthorn.

I have no idea whatsoever what this incredibly vague statement means.  I
also have no idea why that would cause the sudden termination without
explanation or notice of a longstanding access arrangement.

On the other hand, SVLUG utterly failing to supervise attendees and
permitting a specific one to abuse the facility during and at an SVLUG
event, that sounds like sufficient motive, to me.

There is a lesson, there, and one that I bloody well _hope_ is not
getting lost in your haste to misparse what I said and derail my point:  
Any LUG needs to ensure that it is -- collectively and severally -- a
well-behaved guest in any such corporate arrangement, or it can expect 
to be dumped to the curb.  It's therefore strongly in the LUG's interest
to dump misbehaving members to the curb _before_ everyone gets thrown
out.

If you really aren't getting that point, I don't want to hear about
that, to be frank.

> Before speculating whether Michael was to blame, it might be
> of note that (IIRC) Google was still his employer at that time, before
> he moved to Sony.

First, I doubt that very, very much.

Second, I'm pretty damned sure that an employee (at that company or any
other) swanning in on a weekend and filling a backpack with the
conference centre food supplies is against corporate policy.  And even
if that we were supposed to accept that astonishing proposition, I would
expect the Installfest Coordinator to intervene and say 'Um, I don't
think you should be doing that, and fear that SVLUG will be
responsible', and insist that the gentleman cease the food dive unless
he could summon corporate security to vouch for his action being
perfectly fine.

I have to wonder:  Is this just you arguing for the sake of arguing?