Session Start: Sat Jun 08 10:45:31 2002 * Logging #r7staff to '#r7staff0608.log' Great allows me to grab another slice of cold pizza :-) *** AlexDTS is now known as R7RC *** klufie is now known as R7COS Good morning, folks, and welcome to our latest regional staff meeting. Hiya, everybody! Without further ado, let's welcome our new RC, Alex Rosenzweig... who isn't even waiting for an introduction. *** MAL_Adjusted is now known as OIC_7thBDE :-) Heheheh oh well, if we're being official Thanks, Michael. :) *** Gibbie is now known as VC_Comm :) *** SFCC is now known as R7CC *** The-Wolf is now known as The-Wolf-SFDC And of course, that's Alex's cue to begin discussing matters. Remember, if you want to speak, please message me. *** marco235 is now known as R7Comm *** Milan is now known as R7WebDiva First, just as a matter of record, let us note that we have myself, Ed, Klufie, Steve, Lauren, Martin, Dean, Dixie, and Kyle in attendance. Now, that covered, we have about a dozen items on the agenda at this point (not counting subparts ;) ). All the major items should match what was sent out the other day. Did anyone not get that post? I didn't but Steve just forwarded it to me, should be in my hands shortly I might have but didn't notice I just got it, don't you just love the internet :) :) Issue 1: Command Structure. Clarify positions and responsibilities. And Update of handbook. We're not gonna do this whole thing all at once, obviously, and not with this level of turnout. I have received, so far, two requests to help with the Handbook updates. I' ll add a third Ray was previously working on the VRC responsibilities... until he had his heart attack. After that, the project was sort of put on hold. It may be a good idea to let him be involved, too. And put me in, as well. * R7Comm would also like to be involved. My thinking, initially, is to set up a committee to work on it. Question becomes how big the initial committee should be. Taking everyone who just spoke up, plus me ex officio, should probably be plenty big enough. I had a thought on part of the VRC job (go figure) In an effort to have chapters better utilize them why not only allow chapters who file their MSRs (or other benchmark) to be allowed to vote in the VoC for VRCs? * R7RC notes the committee to provisionally consist of: Bob V., Kyle, Dixie, Michael, Steve, Ray, and himself. that may go against the constitution though I don't think the Constitution addresses VRCs. Fleet constitution? the SFI Consitution does not say you have to send MSRs to Regional VRCs but why should someone vote for a VRC that doesn't use them? doh!, read that wrong thats okay. :-) Lots o' alphabet soup. ;) Any other opinions on the idea? oh which, the VRC one or the Handbook one? VRC at the moment. I know I maybe "bais" (being a VRC) but I know I would be pissed after helping alot of people out to be voted out by people who don't even use the "office". It's like people who bitch about the CQ but never submit anything. I'd think that before we'd want to institute something like that we'd want to have it codified into the handbook that "all CO's must send their MSR's to the appropriate VRC" first, then we could look at creative enforcement ideas -karma.fleetchat.org:@#r7staff- R7COS invited VRC3R7 into the channel. *** VRC3R7 (jirc@27ea28c2.4b89d8f.nycap.rr.com) has joined #r7staff Good morning, Lamar. Hi, Lamar! I've mentioned that at the last two (three?) R7 Conferences at the Sector meetings Hi sorry about being late 's a'right. That's OK. still good to have it written down, so that you have something to cya once you move to enforcement. We're currently discussing the following idea from Ed, Lamar... In an effort to have chapters better utilize them why not only allow chapters who file their MSRs (or other benchmark) to be allowed to vote in the VoC for VRCs? it is a good idea, but we need to make sure there is a note before setting that up like VC_Comm is saying I think Dixie makes a good point. Establish the requirement on a formal basis, and then see what we have to do to make 'em follow it. the other pitfall is establishing a "fair" standard. perfect performance? 90%? over what time horizon? etc. The realization is that the Fleet-level procedures do NOT have the requirement, and there will be those who'll question whether we have the authority to add it. my thinking was the Vote for VRC was a nice "doggie treat" for those who followed the rule/suggestion. Probably over 1 year and 10-11 months or higher reporting rate. * R7RC suggests 75% or better reporting. That would be at least 9/12 over a full year. Doable? Everybody? I would guess that SFI (and R7) have over 90% reporting via Email so it's not that hard to Carbon Copy someone anymore. Bingo. Alex, with the handbook being a supplement, would that not help to over come that agruement * R7RC was typing that very point, himself. ;) To a point, Kyle, but at the same time, there are those who'll point out that it's the Fleet regs that take precedence. actually if you'll allow me to quote from Mark Vinson's recent CQ article: Quote away... and those who don't want to follow "R7 house rules" won't be allowed a say in the VRC - that's my thinking. Chapters are also required to send MSR's to their respective Regional Coordinator and any other Regional Office they deem necessary" They referring to the RC I hope, not the Chapters, right? maybe we could send up an amendment to rewrite this for the fleet regs * R7RC kinda hopes that, too. ;) there is a LOT of rewriting to do. that's the way I read it, though I'll admit it's ambiguous point being, current ops seems to support the "thou must send it to thine VRC" idea :) Not necessarily. Key words are "they deem necessary." It refers to the chapters, not the region. right now if chapters do not file reports with the VRC there is nothing we can do about it (which doesn't bother me) but those same chapters who don't use the VRC post are allowed to have a say in who is VRC. I read it similarly, Dix, just wondering what the anal-retentive hair-splitters will say. At a minimum, let's start by putting it into our reporting regs, and proceed from there. And that, Alex, is what the anal retentive hair-splitters could cite. it won't matter, since they'll be getting a friendly note from the rc saying "please copy your vrc, otherwise we won't give you credit as reporting" so we're in basic agreement here, it's just an implementation question. Yes. Yup when informing about that, keep in mind to tell people to use the additional email address section with the online form so we do not have the problem with the VRC not being listed with the form I know even though I have mentioned it at the past few R7Conf's some people still didn't know that VRC's get a copy of the MSR Good point, Kyle. I always heavily encourage use of hte online form (espically if you ahave a password which will attach your roster) OK. Anything else on the handbook? * OIC_7thBDE nods Martin? Well, we can hit them with it in three areas: Posted highlights of this meeting to the R7 list(s), "Fleet 7", and in-person meetings, e.g., SL. Regarding online MSR - (didn't I say that in the last F7 while I was intermin RC?) Sorry, nodding to the above.... Yes. And we'll have to remind them several more times, I'm sure. :) OK, folks. Anything else on this topic? do we have an estimate on how long we want the handbook to go before completion should we go down the list of Regional jobs and touch on each or leave that for the "handbook committee"? On the Handbook in general, shall we remand specific discussion to the committee at this point? * VC_Comm thinks that's a good idea Leave it to the committee. Leave it to the committee we should probably set a specific deadline though for completion. and then set a project plan for each phase. I will forward my job description from the SFMC handbook to the COmmittee. It is fairly clearly defined. :) How many sections does the current version have? 7 major articles there are currently 7 article in the handbook Assorted subsections therein. it may also be advantageous to rearrange the sections for ease of reading/writing Yes. A-men. Will six to nine months work? i was thinking a release date of 1/1/03. that sounds reasonable * R7RC agrees. That would be about six months. It works. with co ratification by 3/31/03 when should we see a draft of what the handbook is going to look like THAT is critical. It lends credibility to the document. quick thought - why not show off at the R7 Conf and vote on it before the closing cerimony? Lamar, sometime after January 1. Right Alex? alternately, we can release the document in phases, as each phase is completed. No. That cuts the process to 2.5 months. To do it right, we need more time. just typing that Right. Upon draft completion on or about 1 Jan., we then send copies to the COs for review. Possibly post the file to region7.com ! for member review? If your talking giving it to the chapter CO's by then should we not see it first for review That works. yes, the staff should first get a review * OIC_7thBDE agrees. Ninety days allows for review and CO ratification. I think the staff will need to be in on the process as it goes along, especially reviewing any sections dealing with their positions. the staff list will come in handy for this too Yup. Really, the reason for the committee is so we don't have to tie up the whole staff with all the minutiae. in this case it would be used to make sure we get things from the staff such as their descriptions and like Absolutely! And then the committee will handle stuff like document design and layout and such. committee would work on content right? Layout is just "fluff", IMHO * R7RC must admit that he really is not a fan of the current layout of the Handbook. not really, I'm printing the current handbook and it really doesn't look great, a snazzy layout would greatly improve it communications dept. can handle layout. Content first, fluff later. Amen to Steve. Layout isn't entirely fluff, because how the book physically is put together plays into its usability. exactly Alex :) BUT... We need to have good content before we can do layout, and having Comm do layout is fine with me. :) OK. Anything else here, or do we move on to issue 2: personnel matters? Okay, I'd say we've dealt sufficiently with this topic. handbook stuff in more detail remanded to committee. motion to move on to topic 2 Second No motion needed. Done. Personnel. As you know, Rahadyan has resigned as Historian. I think that, before we call for apps for a new one, we should be in agreement on what the job should entail, and if it needs to have any changes from what it currently is described to be. Yes? agreed * The-Wolf-SFDC nods * VC_Comm agrees agreed I don't know if we have a written description. If not, I need to write one. If you all want to look at it, I'm OK with that. Can we hold off till the handbook is done for a historian? I'd at least like the VRCs to see it, Mike, because we seemed to have a lot of confusion about the parameters of the job in the last year or so, from what i saw. On holding off, maybe. If someone can "keep the records" on an interim basis, it's doable. If not, we need at least a caretaker. And letting VRCs look at things is not a problem. there does not appear to be a written discription and yes it need defining. The handbook committee will need that definition as well. :) do you have anyone in mind that can function as an interim at this time Okay, let's do this: Mike, want to draft a description, then run it by me and the VRCs? Get input from Tim, if he's amenable. And, brb. No idea on interim. And NP on putting a job description together. could we speak with scott and see what he says maybe, as a suggestion for it Let me work within the region first. Our needs may be different from Fleet's. but it's a good guideline, I know that SCott and Rahadyan worked very closily ermm start point rather than guideline maybe After I work with Tim, then I'll see if we need to go to Akers. back Sounds good, Mike. OK. May I bring up a point? Point away. * OIC_7thBDE ducks This will need to be discussed by the handbook committee further, and I don't want to get into a long discussion here, however, I would appreciate if, for now, Alex and I be kept in the loop on all regional appointments, including lower offices. also place the distincation of the difference between "R7 Staff" and "Staff assigned to R7" * R7RC wants to know firsthand about all the R7 staff, because sooner or later, it all comes bck up the line to his desk to know what's going on. :) Yes. The preceding applies only to Region 7 Staff. It does NOT apply to Fleet-assigned staff (Marines OIC office, IG, etc.). Thanks Ed. Best approach is that you all tell me and cc Alex. Alex and I can then discuss any potential issues privately. I will still keep ya guys informed though :) Helps to disseminate info :) BTW, Michael and Ed, could you make sure I have a full and current contact list for the staff, as well as the chapters? please note: I am hoping to change the direction of ambassadors within the regional level as being picked by the regional staff Note that, most of the time, it will be a "do the appointment. I don't see an issue." Alex will be cc'ed on that. Alex, we will work off the last roster JC sent out in Starbase 7 News. Same here with the Cadet Department Okay. Got that. I will update and get you a copy. Excellent. :) I believe I will need to get the ABs approval on the issue, but I do not see it as a problem Note also that Stuart Roth will be announced in the next day or so as the new copy editor for Fleet 7. Sashi resigned (officially in April). Other main thing from me in the short-term: Any suggestions for either a) positions we might want to add, or b) positions we may want to delete because they're proving superfluous? Anything else here? BTW: Stu is with the Flying Fox. yes we may realize the answer for "superfluous and missing" positions as we redefine duties in the handbook rewrite. what about an information specialists An information specialist?? which details the process of communications, ensures there function and continue and makes improvments and such this is a person who exames information systems and analyzes them and makes recommendations that can improve the communication structures and such the idea is to streamline functionalities and eliminate duplications of efforts if they occur. have to run... laters! Bye Lauren. not to add additional staff which will be doing things already under someone else's duties. We'll have the log available, btw. Anything you need to say before you go, Lauren? Yes. Steve is right. I think we've done a good job of tossing out useless positions, so far. region7.com!!!!! * R7RC also agrees with Steve. I can't think of any more to pare down. There are always possibilities, but the handbook committee may want to review those. Any site-related stuff you wanna hit us with real quick? :) who functions as this, so I know If there are any. We should never say never. Well.... In effect, Kyle, that function is taken by both Alex and me. As we know, 7th brigade now has a home at Region7.com! WooHoo!!! The R7 conference site has online registration with Paypal, as well as dowenloadable forms. so check it out baby.... I have to update the 773rd status on the 7th BDE site Also, I wanted to announce that as I am on the election ticket for Academy Webmaster. If I am placed in that position, I will be stepping down in January as R7 webmaster. Just a notice on that. BTW, send me the info, Dean. on its way, Lauren Our loss would be Academy's gain. You'd be missed in that role, Lauren. thanks Can you look into seeing what good web talent is around in R7 to possibly succeed you? It's been a great opportunity, esp. considering the site had a lotta great features to work with. I have a list of prospects I'm working on, yep, but we also should put announcements out for applications if I resign. These things take time. ;-) laters... Oh, we will. You and Michael and I should make sure that we have a proper job description so we can solicit apps. 'Later! Okay, back to personnel in general. Sorry for brief out-of-orderedness. ;) OK. While we're on jobs/positions, let's jump to number 7: resuscitating RDC program. has there been an "outcry" for the return of this program? * R7RC was considering 7th Fleet Chief of Personnel, to mirror what SFI's is supposed to do, gathering resumes/CVs from interested R7 members in case positions come open. Actually, Mike, can we hold on that one for a couple? that's what I was going to ask. Unless there's a huge outcry for it, or a radical new idea to implement it, I'm not sure it's worthwhile. the last program was a spectacular failure oops save that for later on then. : ) I am a firm beliver that simpler and smaller are better. OK. Do you want to do anything else re: personnel. Otherwise, I think we can bring this in here. * R7RC points up at his personnel comment. that sounds like a good idea Alex its ok with me Something to go under Ops. :) so where does that leave us now? Actually, borrowing from an idea that got posted to the CS Election List, might we want to put up a page at region7.com! to outline any open positions, as we know about them? I don't think we need both a chief of personnel and chief of staff. I think that, at this level, one person can do this job. Already there. Not active right now. That's because everything was on hold pending your arrival. CoS and CoP sound like the same thing aren't they? (or isn't that what we're saying?) That's what I'm saying. *** R7WebDiva has quit IRC (Ping timeout) depends on how Alex wants to define the CoS duties. Remember that position is variable depending on who's staff he's chief of (the general he not the specific he Michael) Yes. But do we want a human resources coordinator, in effect? Do we really need one. Okay, hohas not Chief of Staff had general oversight duties for the entire R7 support staff, making sure that that arm of things is running smoothly? Well gang, I hate to do this but I have a doctor's appt at 12:30pm so I must run I'll reply to that in a second. Dean, do you have anything to say real quick. Yes I do Floor's yours, Dean. We have The Awards and Essay Contest for both R7CC and SFCC. If you like to receive info, please email ASAP. Nominations & Entries must be receive by the new deadline of JUlu 22nd 2002 oops July and to let you all know REGION 7 leads this year's Fleet Cadet Corps nominations with 7 nominees Hav you made a general post about that, Dean? Cool! yes I have back in April but I will make a new post when I get back Okay. Re-post as you see fit to keep it in people's minds. later today Is Lamar here today Yes I'm here Oh hey, can you please email me: tomcat1701@yahoo.com after the meeting I have to discuss some things with you and That's all I have from the Cadet department Thanks, Dean. Have a good meeting and see you all later Good luck at the doctor's. bye Dean Take care, Dean and good luck. Have fun Dean One reminder, try to be my Klingon arrest at SL next month OK. Back on topic. bye allll Bye bye. *** R7CC has quit IRC (Leaving: ) Responding to Alex earlier... Anyway... Is the feeling pretty strong here that a Chief of Personnel would be extraneous at this point? Yes. Yep I think so I would say so. * The-Wolf-SFDC nods Okay, idea's spiked. :) Do you want to try Number 7 now? Okay with me. so repeating from above, unless there's a huge cry or a vastly new idea I'm not sure it's worthwhile. I'll repeat what I was going to say: I think we need to focus on other areas. And ditto Dixie. * R7RC agrees. as deputy RDC for Command I mailed a survey to every CO in the region with a postage paid return, and got less than 50% response people just didn't care That's pretty much been the feedback I've gotten from everybody who's responded, really. all that seemed to happen with some of the rdc programs is people got empty titles. at what time was this and that's something i'd like to avoid. * VC_Comm thinks That's how I feel about the Fleet program overall, though there are exception. I was DRDC in 97 I think... maybe 96 back there sometime :) I don't recall the mailing - when was it? We've tried the RDC Program at least three times, and it's crashed and burned three times. what if we post the idea to the main r7 list and see what the region says hmm must have been 95 or 96 (based on my remembering where I was working and in what cube I was located - how sad is that) Because the talk's easy, Kyle. The follow-through, each and every time, has sucked. BUT... How 'bout this... so, the initial idea was there, but there was no one to lead the way is what made it fail then= No, we had leaders, and the chapters ignored them. no Kyle, it was more of a people just didn't want the program, as much as they said they did. Jesse was doing a hell of a lot of work for his division and just got no response. okay But what if we did this: If a certain number of members would like to create an office that might function the way one or another of the RDCs did, and gets some threshold number of members to sign on in support, we establish *that office*? there were some good RDC chiefs but yeah the support for them just wasn't there. hmmmm e.g., we get petitioned by 20 people for an R7 Engineering Office, we create R7 Engineering. And so on. that sounds like it might work sounds like a good plan If we eventually manage to get 6 or 7 of these offices, all working, we declare the RDC Program alive again. ;) Sneaky back-door approach. >:) get out of my head Alex, I just said the same thing to Steve. :) The concern I have with that is someone could get enough people to petition and become in charge of the group just for a title. LOL! I'm very way about people hogging titles just to hog them. Yeah, but then it has to work, Mike, and keep working. I know what you mean (Ed says as he checks both his CO, USS JUSTICE and VRC, Region 7 hats) There has to be a gauge then to determine it's working. * R7RC agrees. A performance metric would be necessary. * OIC_7thBDE hides his three other hats. Ed, you hold two titles and do both jobs. Alex holds two (?) titles and does the job. Some people hold two titles and don't do a damn thing. For some, it's an ego thing, and that can kill an organization. So how about this... Each office has to come with a prospectus for how it would work, reviewable for approval by the RC, VRCs, and COS. I going to have to go. I pulled a muscle in my back yesterday the medicine I'm taking for it is starting to kick in. OK to Alex. Ouch to Lamar. * VC_Comm waves goodbye to the woozy Lamar :) Take care of yourself. Feel better Lamar Okay, Lamar. We'll get the log posted. Lemme have any feedback you want. :) later Lamar Thanks catch you later Take care of yourself. *** VRC3R7 has quit IRC (Leaving: Leaving) 12:15 -- I will have to get going soon myself So. Okay, given the general agreement, anything else on RDCs? we better move this along ..... Yeah. * R7RC notes that more than half of the agenda remains. We have sooo much ground to cover. :/ Another meeting will be necessary. ASAP. :-( May I make a suggestion? Y'all can get used to a LOT of collaboration. :) Looking at the agenda, I think the matter we really need to cover here are 4, 5, 6 and 10 from Alex's agenda. They should go quick. Save 3 and 7 for later. You read my mind Kluf :) I have a couple chapters that were asking about timeline for the R7 Holiday party Well, I think we're done with RDCs. Do wehave anhything in place for regional events, aside from the picnic and Conference so far? Halloween Party. I have the info and need to post it. I have a group looking for info when they need to put bid in for the holiday party Should we ask first if the Army-Navy party is doable this year? * R7RC suggests a bid cut-off of...hmm...SL. Yeah, that's the ticket. :) wouldn't they still bid like everyone else? (the Army/navy party) I want open bids, personally. Obviously Army-Navy would be pretty compellin, if submitted. compelling, even... My understanding is that, because of 9/11, they would have first dibs this year. My advice is to ask them first, then open to bids if necessary. didn't know that Had they been given a specific first-dibs option? I believe they had. Let's ask JC. I seem to remember they would get a first shot. I was just looking at some back e-mails to see if I could find anything concrete to back that up. Okay. We check on that. Was Sandy coordinator for the whole thing? I think Sandy was just doing the Navy half. I think it was him for the south, Bob for the north. Bob took over the North when West Point became out. Alex, you want to send that e-mail? CC me. I thought hte Sun Tzu was on the West Point detail. actually, no he did not he was announcing things for Sandy You're right, Ed. I just can't remember which CO. the Sun Tzu had the north portion * The-Wolf-SFDC is CO of the Sun Tzu My bad, Kyle. :) Kyle, do you recall if you folks were given a first-dibs deal on this year? trying to remember -- I know we still have the deposit one the place for it there was a lot going on during that time with the command change over and other changes Okay, I'll follow up on that. Do we want to open for bids on a NYE party? If the answer is no first dibs, then open bids with deadline of Shore Leave weekend (Saturday, July 13) or Monday thereafter (July 15)? What about "expanding" the R7Conf bid timeline? Seems like there is very little time for people to put a bid together I'm not sure we'd get people to travel, especially with holiday in middle of week. Let's say Saturday, so we can get to work reviewing and choosing right after. ed, let's put that off to next meeting. okay We can announce changes at the conference, which gives us enough expansion time. * R7RC wants to see the R7 Conference timeline expanded, definitely. OK to Alex. * R7COS agrees with Alex and Ed. It works for Fleet, it can work here. We're going to need a provisional timeline for transitioning, and then a revised permanent timeline in the new protocol. Anything else in this area? Event wise - not to my knowledge. Let's move along. Mike Smith's Listserv? Opinions? Do we want to have him make a formal offer? Yes. We are at 12:30. Next up: Mike's list offer. Alex, please explain concisely. depends on how much functionality we want to make from the Yahoo group. It offers features such as file sharing, photo sharing, calendaring and database housing that Mike cannot In short, Mike has offered the use of a server to host the R7 list and other stuff as needed within limits, to get us off the annoying yahoogroup. I like his offer already but we should look at all the pros & cons. I agree a "formal offer" should be arranged. (I'm sure mikey won't have a problem with that) I need to jump in the shower also we might want to think about the problems that come along with having something like this belong to a specific person rather than a public service. What if Mike were to leave (not likely I know, but something to think about) or goes out of the server business I'm going to be messing with the R7-announce and R7staff features, so we' can we get a draft of the pros and cons to review and decide after reviewing them, like at next meeting will see what I can do with yahoogroups. brb