The Professional Association for SQL Server holds annual elections for the Board of Directors. The Board decides things like:
- Where to hold the annual PASS Summit – for the last couple of years, it’s been in Seattle, and the Board decided to keep it in Seattle for another few years. I blogged about my frustrations with the PASS Summit location here.
- Whether PASS should start a new magazine – in 2009, with magazine businesses failing left and right, PASS decided to launch an online magazine. You probably didn’t hear about it because the content was locked behind a walled garden, far away from search engines. Volunteers gave their time and PASS gave its money to get this thing off the ground only to give up and close it down a few issues later. Is a lack of volunteer resources really a problem? Given that the SQL Server Standard page hasn’t even been updated to reflect that it’s closed, so I’d say yes. I blogged about my frustrations with the hidden SQL Server Standard content here.
- How PASS HQ should help chapters – I launched the Virtualization Virtual Chapter last year, became the first virtual chapter to get funding directly from sponsors, and busted my hump to get it to work. I became completely disenchanted when the PASS Board contact for virtual chapters couldn’t be bothered to phone into their own scheduled meetings for virtual chapter leaders. I didn’t blog about this because I hoped it would get better, and in a sense it did – they stopped having the meetings, sending a clear signal about the worth of chapters.
- Launching PASS’s own social network, the PASSport – apparently because PASS could do a better job at LinkedIn, FaceBook, or Twitter, they put resources into launching PASSport, a social networking program. Meanwhile, the community launched the #sqlhelp tag on Twitter with zero resources and accomplished much more.
- Starting blog syndication – I couldn’t speak out against this when I was Editor-in-Chief of SQLServerPedia because I would have sounded like I was bashing competition, but I was convinced there was no way this would succeed. Managing a blog syndication tool is seriously hard work, not just something you slap together in code and walk away from, and I knew this would be another one of those shiny objects that distracted PASS momentarily. Today, with all of the killer blog content out there, the PASS syndicated feed is averaging 1-3 posts PER MONTH. SQLServerPedia syndicates more good content per day.
I mention those things in particular because they’ve been hot-button issues for me. I’ve watched PASS do these things, and I just shook my head. I didn’t understand why the Board would make decisions like this, and I looked forward to election time so we could set things straight. I felt that the existing leadership was making some gambles that just didn’t make sense in the year 2010.
I couldn’t wait for election time so I could help make a real difference in how the Board operates.
Meet the Board of Director Candidates
So let’s meet the candidates in alphabetical order:
- Allen Kinsel: Blog – @SQLInsaneo – Election Profile
- Andy Warren: Blog – @SQLAndy – Election Profile
- Douglas McDowell: Blog – @DouglasMcDowell – Election Profile
- Geoff Hiten Blog – @SQLCraftsman – Election Profile
- Mark Ginnebaugh Blog – @MarkGinnebaugh – Election Profile
Here’s where it starts to suck for me: all of these guys are good guys. I can’t wave my hands and say, “WE CAN’T ELECT THIS GUY, HE’S AN IDIOT! HE’S NEVER DONE ANYTHING FOR THE COMMUNITY!” All of these guys have a long history of volunteering for the community, doing good work at the local and regional level. I respect their accomplishments and their technical knowledge.
And it gets worse – this isn’t even everyone who tossed their hat in the ring! The PASS Nomination Committee filtered out a longer list of candidates to whittle it down to five, and along the way, Steve Jones (Blog – @Way0utwest) didn’t make the cut. Stuart Ainsworth (Blog – @StuartA) served on the Nomination Committee and blogged about why Steve didn’t make the ballot. I applaud Stuart’s honesty and transparency, and there’s a great discussion going on in the blog comments there. That means there’s two things I’m fired up about – Steve not making the ballot (because I would personally endorse Steve’s candidacy in a heartbeat), and picking the right candidates.
Who I’m Voting For
The things that matter most to me are:
- Dedication to communication – a proven history of letting us know what they’re up to via blogs and Twitter, because I want to know what PASS is up to
- Dedication to transparency – anybody who says the word “privacy” in relation to a community organization immediately gets a big -1 in my book
- Moving the Summit around to let more people experience this killer event
- Using existing community tools, not reinventing new ones thereby saving PASS resources for things that really matter
- Not focusing on meaningless metrics because membership numbers are meaningless to me – I want quality, not quantity
- Not implementing a certification program because these are hellaciously expensive to build, and would bankrupt PASS
- A willingness to rock the boat because I respect people who stand up for what they believe in, even if that opinion isn’t popular
Because these things matter to me, I’m voting for Allen Kinsel, Andy Warren, and Geoff Hiten – but that doesn’t mean Douglas or Mark aren’t worth votes. They’re great guys. It just doesn’t mean my priorities line up a particular way.
Who You Should Vote For
You shouldn’t just vote for Allen, Andy, and Geoff because I said so. You should ask questions about what’s important to you, and hear what the candidates and other people have to say.
Here’s how: go to the discussion forums at elections.sqlpass.org and start asking questions. You have to be logged in to post – click Login at the top of the page. I’ve helped by starting out several threads including:
- Should we move the PASS Summit?
- Should PASS offer a certification program?
- Tell me about a time when you made a mistake.
You can start new threads asking your own question, and you can discuss your thoughts in other people’s question threads too. I’ll edit my question posts to point to specific candidates’ answers to make it easier to navigate the forum replies, because I bet these will get active pretty quickly.
19 Comments. Leave new
Good post!
I would also say that Andy is one of the people that are trying to not come up with ideas in a vaccum from within the sanctity of the secure PASS underground bunker. He is constantly throwing out ideas to the community and talking with people to find out what they think. So I know that he doesn’t suffer from the “I’m the smartest man in the bunker..” syndrome. Plus, he freely admits when he is wrong and has the courage to change his mind…Just read his post on pulling the plug on the SQL Server Standard thing.
So that’s why I am going to vote for Andy…along with some others…
Cheers!
AJ
Absolutely, that’s also why I’m voting for Andy. Everybody makes mistakes – me included – and I admire people who continue to take risks, listen to feedback, and discuss openly when things work or don’t work.
As usual a great post. We agree on almost all points. As you know from offline conversations, I’m in favor of certifications, but I don’t think that they are something PASS should do right now, but it should be in the plan somewhere.
I honestly don’t know who I’ll be voting for beyond Andy because I don’t think I know enough about the stands of all the other candidates, but I’ll be finding out.
Agree with most of what you posted here, Brent….except for:
“Dedication to transparency – anybody who says the word “privacy” in relation to a community organization immediately gets a big -1 in my book”
I know that “privacy” is sometimes used as a get-out-of-jail-free term for secrecy, but in itself privacy is a significantly important part of running an association. Privacy is about allowing people (members, candidates, vendors, partners, attendees) having control over how their data is used by another party. It is not about hiding or making data secret, per se.
So perhaps you meant “misuses the term ‘privacy'” in your rant.
Also, do you have more of a call to action? I do want to ask question, but do you want to recommend that pass members also voice their dissatisfaction with the process and procedures to the BoD so that we aren’t making this an annual rant?
You’re right on about privacy.
I don’t have a call to action on fixing the process because we can’t fix it in time for this election. I wish we could, but it’s in the Board’s hands now, and I want people to focus on getting the right people on the Board. I’ll follow up after the election with my thoughts on what worked and what didn’t, but I’m not raging mad about the process. I really wish Steve hadn’t been filtered out as unqualified to be on the ballot, and I want more info on why, but that’s a parallel track.
Begin Rant
I agree with everything. In my case, it actually made me think that I should back off from PASS. I became active late last year. Started a Chapter and was planning to do some volunteer work.
But when you have controversy coming up like this, it makes you feel disappointed with the whole system. I also read a post where PASS turned down volunteers just because they are not MVPs. That is not right.
I was hoping to see Steve name up there. I would love to know why he was not selected. The reason that was given just does not wash.
End Rant
Agreed 100% with your selections.
Geoff is entirely transparent and has shown time and again in various conversations that he has a logical, clear thought process. Occasionally I’ve felt that he was … how to put this delicately … somewhat overbearing, and I think that’s a plus for the board. We need people who can take control, not wallflowers.
Allen has been equally transparent and has been extremely involved. I thought he already was a board member. He’s easy to deal with and has my vote.
Andy has said some things on his blog that I totally disagree with–for example, that PASS should make it so that the same people can’t speak too many times in a row–but I think his heart is in the right place. So he has my vote.
As for the other two? Douglas has been very good about entertaining some e-mails from me regarding concerns with the Regional Mentor program but I have seen no positive action taken. And Mark might be a great guy but I wouldn’t know. He’s not active on Twitter and his blog reveals very little about him except that he doesn’t seem to do much with SQL Server. If he wants to win a seat he’s going to have to seriously up his personal branding.
Without reading all the bylaws of Pass the bit that gets me as a SQL DBA is this:
A guy I trust stands for election.
The guy is removed from the ballot just before the election takes place.
If it really is a job interview it shouldn’t be touted as an election.
Perhaps a manifesto like a political candidate followed by a first round of voting to whittle down the candidates.
If there is a criteria it should be publicly stated and all candidates have to meet it.
Good post as always, sir.
I am voting for Douglas McDowell, Geoff Hiten, and Andy Warren.
Doug is an excellent technologist, an outstanding leader, a good lister, and he is fair.
Geoff is one of the most committed SQL MVPs I have ever met. An easy guy to approach who is always willing to help who is always extremely competent.
I have never met Andy (as far as I can recall) but I read everything he writes and he impresses me as smart, clear thinking, reasonable, fair, and competent.
I am sure the others who are on the slate and those who were not selected to be on the slate are also qualified and committed. Of the slate, those are my best choices to serve PASS.
Curious, especially after the discussions from last year and this, how can you (any of you) decide already who you will be voting for? We haven’t had a chance as a community to grill the candidates yet, Brent started us off in the election discussion forum, but it seems premature to be making a selection without allowing the candidates to speak.
Not that I don’t realize everyone does this, just saying perhaps as upholders of the effort to have the community be involved in the decision, let’s not pre-select any more than we want PASS to pre-select.
Jack Corbett said it well elsewhere, (paraphrasing) “Candidate A,B,C are my current choices since they align with my views the most, but I’ll have to find out more”
Jon – great question. I made my decision now because I know what’s important to me, and I’ve been able to build personal relationships with the candidates over time. I’ve seen the actions they’ve taken, and I know which ones hold the most promise to me.
In a perfect world, we base our voting decisions on things we know – not what people say. There’s not much the candidates can say to me at this point to change how I feel about my issues and how they act on those issues. I don’t have anything against Douglas & Mark on those issues – it’s just that Allen, Andy, and Geoff have done things that make me want to see what they’ll do on the Board for a year.
Hi Jon,
Fair question. I should have explained a bit more about my rationale.
I worked with Doug as a Mentor for Solid Quality Mentors and know him to be an upstanding man of integrity.
I have known Geoff since my first PASS in 2004 and search his name when ever I have a clustering problem. The guy is top notch.
I can’t say I am as familiar with Andy but over years of reading him, he has impressed me.
I like Allen and think is his one of our communities new, young stars. I am expecting big things from him as he matures.
I know nothing about Mark Ginnebaugh but I did read as much as I could find about him.
I feel I have enough first hand experience with Doug and Geoff to make a good choice and I feel confident from the years I’ve read Andy that he is among the best available choices also.
Chuck
Thanks to both for the followup, that makes perfect sense, nothing they say on the campaign would change personal experience with them.
This is not a rant. Why is there even a nominating committee? How many is too many candidates? I get frustrated in the US that essentially I can pick between 1 million different kinds of cereal for breakfast, but when it comes to president you have two options, well three if you don’t vote. How about this PASS board…Let everyone run! Hold some online debates, either on Twitter, or via a webcast; sort the wheat from the chaff. Crowd source your nomination committee. They’ll do a better job of it, and if they don’t then back to status quo you can go. At the very least it would be fun to see how it shakes out.
Christian,
That’s crazy talk. How could anyone control such a thing?
:{>
I know right… by the way, just read your post about PASS elevtions and am going to read the itnerviews you did. Thanks for that.
Brent – Thanks for your post and your interest/attention/passion for the elections process. I am personally pleased with the amount of community interest in this, it is a compelling proof-point that speaks volumes about the quality and strength of our SQL Server community.
Per your post, I will go on record for everyone as the director that did not take good care of Virtual Chapters this year, and for no-showing for a call. I am sorry. I will skip any reasons; at the end of the day I am a volunteer and can drop the ball when I get really overcommitted. I honestly did not realize your disenchantment, obviously I would have known that if I had reached out to you directly. I wish I could make more time in my PASS schedule to maintain frequent individual conversations with all the community stakeholders as the Virtual Chapter guy and the Chapters guy… for this reason alone I am always screwing things up, just the amount of communication needed in these portfolios could be a fulltime job.
I am sorry I will not be getting your vote, but maybe there will be an opportunity to earn it the next time I am on a ballot.
Chuck – Thanks for your support.
Roy – Like I said to Brent above, I appreciate the community debate about the elections because it demonstrates passion—that is healthy. But the reality that debates like this can reshape someone’s overall perception of PASS can be unhealthy. For that reason I appreciate Pat Wright’s post where he chose on a dark day to shine light on some of things we are all doing right with PASS, and when I say “we” I mean ALL of us since PASS is you and me and Brent and Pat and…
To your comment about PASS turning down volunteers: Eric Humphries (@lotsahelp) tweet (“Bummer, looks like @sqlpass isn’t accepting any volunteers for the summit other than MVPs. @phumphrey and I wanted to help out. #sqlpass”) spawned from an email exchange with me. Eric was looking for a conference attendance code (discount/comp) for his wife. I told him that the only in-place volunteer discount/comp program I am aware of for Summit is the offer out to the SQL Server MVP’s that are willing to host tables at the Birds of a Feather (BoF) lunch and staff the Ask the Experts (ATE) area. The Summit is a large-scale event and has less volunteer needs/opportunities then a smaller volunteer-executed event. Just to be clear, PASS is not shutting out volunteers (we love volunteers!) it’s just that the Summit itself does not have a wealth of volunteer roles that provide a discount/comp.
Adam – Thanks for your consistent input, I am finally getting back to Regional Mentor. I have not been working in a serial fashion but there have only been so many things I can focus on at a time and the RM program got pushed back to the second half of the year.
Ooops! I meant “Eric Humphrey’s” … Sorry Eric!
Douglas, Thanks for the info. That part I did not know.