I'm thinking about stepping down - who should replace me?

(Jim Seconde) #21

Hi all!

So, a nominated “board” sat down and discussed the forum and ‘handover’ and what this actually entails. In the attached doc is the consortium of people who want to take over the running of the forum and it’s plans to build on the connections that b.io has already made.

It’s been written up as formally as I could, but the tldr on this is: I was asked if I wanted to take this over, I did, I was in agreement that people should do this with me, b.io is the start - it has a lot of potential, let’s bring people in and do this thing.


Any comments and opinions are welcome. We are, after all, doing this to represent people.

Tech leaders meetup
(Daniel Hollands) #22

We’ll organise a proper handover of various credentials and such over the next couple of weeks, but in the meantime, I’ve set @jims as an admin on the forum.

(Jon) #23

Welcome @jims mod!

(Andy Wootton) #24

I’d like to add my thanks to @LimeBlast for getting this thing started and add “Are you sure you want to give up?”. I think you’ve done a great job by not trying to lead anything. You’ve provided a platform and allowed things to happen on it, deferring to the community whenever you thought it was necessary. Maybe we need leaders that don’t want quite the same things that drive Silicon Canal but I think this is the medium, not part of the message and that’s going to be hard to maintain without a lenient non-dictator such as yourself.

@jims I think you want to take the community places, which is great but I think we need to be very careful what we do with this platform, so that everyone stays engaged. The community is already bigger than this platform but somewhat undefined and without form.

(Jim Seconde) #25

I think given the way I think and the people involved with expanding this platform think, our main focus is making this a community resource for the community by the community. We know this platform works because all it does is connect people, which I highly commend @LimeBlast for what he’s done setting up and maintaining what has become widely known in the tech community.

The job I have is to assign tasks for improving or expanding what we do, not to tell everyone what I or the consortium think you want, so in that respect the looseness of what makes this successful will hopefully continue. @sil’s most relevant comment in terms of what we want to do was that Birmingham is 100 mini-tech scenes, and we just need to break the silo barriers down a bit.

Birmingham is not the new London, it’s our own city - so all we want to do is foster that.

(Andy Wootton) #26

That’s a subject dear to my heart because of all the ways people have failed to “scale agility”. I discovered something a few months ago that surprised me. The best communication in networks isn’t when everyone is connected. It’s small teams with a few connections between them. Extending that idea, it seems to me that we all need a map of all the teams that exist, so we can identify where our engagement would be most valuable.

(Marc Cooper) #27

That’s how you “scale” agile, @woo. Small teams with a few connections. Now that we have powerful and cheap CI/CD, most technical management can be automated.

I’d add that the connections aren’t necessarily direct. It’s often valuable to have regular forums for certain things; simply collaborations that maximise value and minimise politics. Fun too!

(Andy Wootton) #28

Yes, I agree but ‘the corporates’ do love a methodology, so I’ve kept a watching brief on the various emergent frameworks like SAFe and Discipled Agile to see what they have to say. It always seems to destroy agility, as you would expect. Autonomous & connected seems a bit of a reach for most ‘leaders’. You’ve probably worked out that I’m interested in non-hierarchical structures and decision making.

(Matt Andrews) #29

Thanks Jim – I’m excited to get involved and help build on what @LimeBlast has done (plus others). Lots of good stuff happening here in Brum and lots of work we can do too to welcome people into it.

(Richard Cunningham) #30

It’s great to hear that things are moving forward.

I’ve moved the calendar and planet sites to a new Digital Ocean instance (the old one was Ubuntu 14.04, the new one is 18.04). I don’t think there are an issues, but let me know if there are.

The bare birmingham.io domain redirect (with no sub-domain) still points to my old server, so we need to change this (since I want to shutdown the old instance), it can run on my new instance, if needed.

(Daniel Hollands) #31

What do you folks want to do with the bare domain? The original idea was it would act as a landing page for the community as a whole, with a mission statement and links to the various sections (the forum, freelancers, planet, events, etc…) but it never happened. That’s why the forum ended up on talk. rather than directly on the bare domain.

For what it’s worth, I’d support the idea of shifting the forum over to the bare domain, as long as all the old links redirect correctly.

(Richard Cunningham) #32

For context, we discussed this a couple of years ago: Removing the `talk.` subdomain, what do you think?

I notice that in minutes from the meeting, there was some mention of having a landing page, which presumably make sense on the bare domain?

(Matt Andrews) #33

Yep, that was my suggestion! Forum makes sense on talk. IMO.

(Andy Wootton) #34

That leaves options for linking in other ‘independent but loosely connected’ nodes/objects that are considered relevant to ‘the community’, Silicon Canal is an obvious example, with some shared objectives (possibly still unstated by ‘us’) and I’ve noticed other Midland but not Brum initiatives springing up in a hyper-local style e.g. Solihull, Coventry, Stafford in a kind of “Midland Cluster”, with Birmingham at it’s centre (though Stafford is on the edge so some there might think Stoke or Manchester are the centre of their universe. The gravitational pull is about the same.)