|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: I Kept Quiet for far too long. This. Is. WAR!!!
Quote:
“Gracious Professionalism” is one of the major pillars of FIRST. It is the foundation for the culture we work so hard to create, and yet it was never once mentioned in a discussion of 63 posts. Not even once. I’ve never written a post, a message, or a letter, where I am unable to sit down with my readers and talk about the exact same thing in person (yes, even the long ones, with notes...). We should always be able to sit down talk things through reasonably, logically, and professionally. And yet, how many in this thread can say the same thing? How many of you really tried to reach the person behind the sentences and the names? 14, by my count. I spent some time reading the entire discuss, tallying the types of message posted in this thread (multiple messages within a post are counted individually). Here is what I found: 10 posts clarifying the issue and any potential misunderstanding 4 posts expressing willingness to explore both side of the story 15 posts of positive suggestions, constructive criticisms, positive encouragements, and acknowledgments of positive attitude 16 posts exploring important implications of said issue, analyzing the underlying issues of volunteer organization, addressing bigger pictures of FIRST in general, and moving the discussion to a whole different level. I am highly encouraged by these responds made in a very difficult conversation. Your clarifications and willingness to explore kept the discussion calm and kept us looking deeper below the surface. Your suggestions, encouragements, and acknowledgements provided positive outlets and alternative solutions to a very frustrated person in a very frustrating situation. Your intellectual curiosity kept us pushing for more: more honesty, more transparency, more understanding, more self-examining, and more progress. Difficult situations will always be present in any given stages of our lives; we all have to learn to deal with them one way or another. Thanks to you and your attitude, this discussion has become a positive learning experience for Dan, and anyone participating in it or reading through it. I really, really appreciate it. In many ways, you are the engine that keeps the CD forum running. Thank you so much for your message. I cannot repeat that enough. 5 posts expressing support toward the original post 8 posts questioning the effectiveness of the original post I understand where many of you are coming from. I understand your wishes to defend your friend, and the integrity of this forum. In the end your heart is in the right place, but to some I wish you are more understanding, helpful, and willingness to address the needs of who seems like a very frustrated person. To others, I wish there is more tact, more grace, and more appreciation toward the art of communication and conflict resolution. In the end, I favor resolving conflicts with charm, humility, and understanding, and disarming obstacles with guile, humor, and smile, over declarations and confrontations. I hope you do too. 6 posts expressing serious reservations toward volunteer organization as a whole, toward changes in the Chief Delphi Forum, and toward the growth of FIRST in general. 8 posts defending changes in all three areas. Leadership is demonstrated by initiative, examples, and spirit. Decisions are made by those who show up. The world is whatever you make of it. I hear your frustrations; I understand where they are coming from. But this is a changing world, and the world is changing faster by the minute. Don’t just sit idly by watching everything disappear; take it upon yourself to remember exactly what was good in the past, and work hard to incorporate it into the future. If you want to see something continue, you have to work really hard for it yourself. The good news is, there is no limit to what a small group of well intentioned folks can do to create and facilitate changes in this world. So instead of talking about the good old past, I want to see planning for the future. Just like the 8 posts defending changes, right? I am stretching the limit of what’s a reasonable amount to read in one sitting, so I will try to wrap it up. I want to write a personal message to Dan, but I am afraid it will have to wait until another evening. Here are the main questions I want to ask: Where do we go from here? How are we going to turn this difficult, controversial discussion into a positive learning experience for everyone involved? How are we going to move on and create progress? In addition: There is no doubt there is much to be desired from the way FIRST organizes its volunteers. There is no doubt about it. So how are we going to discover, address, examine these issues in a healthy manner, and how are we going produce progress afterward? There is no doubt there is a growing pain in FIRST. Again, there is no doubt about it. So when are we going to identify some of the positive aspects from the past, and begin incorporating them into the future? There is also no doubt we need to work on our communication, communication on all levels, between volunteer and volunteer, between volunteer and regional coordinator, between region and headquarter, between headquarter and individuals. How can we improve communication on all levels? And finally, how do we improve our ability to provide support to those who need them the most? How do we discover problems and provide support early, so we don’t have to resolve conflicts at this level of disagreement? And once we get to this level of disagreement, how do we handle it with charm, humility, and understanding; guile, humor, and smiles? Dan, I have a lot to say to you, but I seem to have ran out of time this evening. For now, I will echo Ken Patton had to say to you earlier: Quote:
Woodie talks to us year after year about the importance of Gracious Professionalism, not just from other people, but also from yourself. FIRST gave us the mission to inspire innovation, self-confidence, communication, and leadership in young people. Robotics is about people. It always was, it always will be. What more guidelines do we need? -Ken Leung P.S. Thank you to the mentors who continue to show true quality, inspiration, and leadership through out the discussion. You continue to inspire me everyday. You know who you are. Last edited by Ken Leung : 02-12-2009 at 17:53. Reason: Typo. |
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: I Kept Quiet for far too long. This. Is. WAR!!!
After that post by Ken Leung, anything I write is bound to look obtuse and boring in comparison; then again, that could be said when comparing any of my posts to Ken’s ...
I don’t post much anymore because often by the time I get around to typing what I feel needs to be said, two or three people have already done so. It seems the opposite has happened in this thread. Amid all the rhetoric and attitude, it appears (to me, at least) that little discussion has occurred about the original claim. Putting aside how one feels about Dan Swando, or his communicative style, there still remains his allegation of a secret black list of Michigan Volunteers. I suppose one’s response to this would be dependent on the perceived veracity of his assertion, or your feelings in favor or against said black list, but they would still be directed toward he claim. After a letter requesting transparency was sent to FIRST a couple months back on behalf of FIRST teams, one would think that the idea of a secret volunteer black list would receive more attention than the title of the thread, no matter how inappropriate. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: I Kept Quiet for far too long. This. Is. WAR!!!
Quote:
I'll try another analogy. Think of Dan's scenario like someone getting back an English paper that is marked at a B, but with no comments written in by the teacher. Is the grade acceptable, sure, and I know that many would be very happy with it, under normal circumstances. With no remarks from the teacher however, it is easy to believe one would be rather indignant. How is one to understand or rectify his errors if he is not made aware of them? Additionally, if the teacher would then refuse to explain the grade after coming to her, would you indignation not increase further? If you make the appropriate substitutions this can be used to understand Dan's scenario. Does the student in the above analogy possess a feeling of entitlement? Actually yes, not for a certain grade though, but merely for a reason behind the less than optimal turn of events. It is an expectation shared by almost everyone. Whenever something happens, be it in a science experiment, or in a relationship, or a disaster the inevitable things sought most isn't for the damage to disappear (we all accept that that won't happen), but for a reason so that we might grow from the experience My $0.02 |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: I Kept Quiet for far too long. This. Is. WAR!!!
I can almost side with both groups here.
I would agree that there is probably a good reason to keep certain people out of certain volunteer positions due to previous mistakes at those positions or similar ones. However, taking Dan's story at face value, he wasn't asking for a volunteer position that he'd had perceived trouble with in that past. In fact, he was asking for one that he was well-qualified for. He was given an alternate position, because the one he asked for was full. Then, at the last minute, he was told that his position was changed after he asked about a change that had been made without his knowledge. To me, if you change something, you tell the people that are affected right away. Don't make them ask you/find out at the last second; they tend to get rather annoyed. Trust me on this; I have some recent experience with this. However, I do not agree with keeping the reason for the blacklist a secret when you've been asked by someone on the blacklist why he or she is on there. People can't read each others' minds very well. You tell them flatly that they are on because of X, they have a chance to explain X. Whether or not they do it to your satisfaction, you've had a chance to hear their side. And, quite frankly, to restrict someone's volunteering to one and only one position is laughable. (Again, I'm taking Dan's statements at face value.) Where can you have no influence on a match? Safety assistant, Spare Parts attendant, Pit admin, gofer, awards assistant... Confining someone to a position that requires them to admit biases--well, if he wasn't biased before, he most likely is now! (Caution: some speculation in the following, due to not knowing the full story) On the other hand, to look at it from the MI board's perspective: A ref made two mistakes against the same team, leading to their loss (perception). Naturally, you wouldn't want that ref reffing you again if you could avoid it. So you ask your VCs to keep him out of certain spots. A VC puts him in a more important spot. You don't want him there, because of your perception, so you have the VC move him behind his back. He asks questions. Later, you tell him to his face that he can't do a job that he's qualified for because you have someone else. Now he's asking you: "Why am I not allowed to volunteer at anything that I would like to do?" You choose not to answer, for whatever reason. He asks again. Again you don't answer. The next thing you know, he's sent the letter to FRC HQ. It isn't public knowledge, yet, but it could become public. [/speculation portion] And then he goes public, some time later. That's about the last straw. Dan, by going public, you may have burned your last bridge with FiM. But if they did, in fact, tell you not to bother them, then they gave the tinder. From what has been posted, I think that this type of blacklist is a very bad thing for FiM, and FRC if it is used elsewhere. 1) It's not gracious. I don't object to a blacklist, but at least tell people WHY they're on it if they ask! 2) No comment on professionalism; it could go either way. 3) It's too broad or too narrow in scope; that is, blocking out all positions except one is a bad idea. At least give a range, or block out ALL positions. 4) If, as is suggested, one team is behind this and able to impose a full ban, that is a bad thing. Just tell the head ref or appropriate official that you don't think that this guy can call you fairly, for crying out loud! That's enough to minimize the impact of any blown calls right there, most of the time. Both sides are at fault; the FiM board for not being open enough to tell someone where they messed up and Dan for going public. That's the way it is in this case, I'm afraid. Like most anecdotes, you only get one side. To fix this: If there are any FiM board members here, it would be a good idea to have a civil get-together with Dan, either by phone or by email or something of that sort if in-person meetings are impractical. Heck, make it a social event and go bowling or whatever Michiganders do during the winter. Figure out why he's on the blacklist, and tell him. That's half the issue, as it gives him a chance to explain and shape up, if he chooses. If you're blocking others out, tell them why as well. FIRST HQ is opening up a bit. Is there a reason FiM can't do the same when requested? The other half of the issue is that it's given both of the affected parties a black eye. That one is the impossible half to fix without a lot of time and short memories. I'm not saying that you completely ditch the blacklist. But, blocking people from one or two positions for cause is completely different from blocking people from most of the positions for something done in one position that may or may not be their fault. Mr. Pockets, if that scenario happened at my school, I'd probably head for the department chair or the Dean of Students to see about the process for filing a complaint of not grading on academics but on personal prejudice. Dan went that route, because the FiM board has at least some oversight from FRC HQ. Dan, if you're still in CA in March, I'm pretty sure you'll be welcome at the L.A. Regional. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Limitations too far? | HUNT397 | Rules/Strategy | 60 | 08-01-2009 14:24 |
| When do mentors go too far? | Spikey | General Forum | 95 | 08-01-2009 14:22 |
| You know you've been in the shop too long this weekend if: | ZZII 527 | General Forum | 138 | 04-03-2006 02:52 |
| Threads getting too long to make sense of | Ken Leung | CD Forum Support | 22 | 05-05-2005 01:14 |
| This board is quiet-- so how bout this election?!?!? | archiver | 2000 | 19 | 24-06-2002 00:23 |