Tag: PASS

I said that I’d write about some good things PASS does, and I’ll make it a point to do so. Despite my complaints and criticisms, I like the organization. I’ve been a part of it since October 1999, when the initial conference was in the basement ballroom of a hotel in downtown Chicago.

Since that time, I’ve attended most of the annual Summits. I’ve missed a few, and the last few years I’ve been on an every-other-year pace, but that’s my issue, not that of the organization.

The Summit has grown from a conference, like every other conference where techies gather to watch presentations, furiously scribble down notes, and then return to their hotel rooms to get a little late night work in for the employer that sent them away to a conference.

That first year was no different for me, though I did meet the amazing Kalen Delaney and managed to ask a semi-intelligent, reasonable question that she answered. I also had my wife, sister-in-law, and infant son with me. We watched the last game of the year at Comiskey Park, smoked cigars and enjoyed wine looking out over the river, and had a great few days in Chicago.

However something happened. I’d like to think that Andy Warren, Brian Knight, and I had a hand in it with our annual SQLServerCentral parties on opening night. Those grew from a line out the door of the reception hall in 2003, to the XBOX debacle and tv giveaway in 2004 to the casino parties with tons of prizes in later years. However we weren’t the only ones and PASS has grown to encompass numerous social events at the Summit and a community of people that greet each other with smile and hugs each fall.

We have more and more attendees that greet larger and larger groups of fellow attendees by name. We have runs, worship services, Women in Technology, kareoke and more, all of which almost overshadow the event itself. They don’t, and there’s lots of information being passed around, but the PASS Summit is way, way more than a conference.

Kudos to the organization, the HQ staff, and the various board members across the last 15 years that have worked hard to build (at times) and let evolve organically (at others), an amazing event.

I don’t want to get too deeply involved in the complaints and struggles of PASS, but I also want to ensure we have a healthy community. I want to have us continue to grow and prosper as data professionals who work with SQL Server. PASS has a mission, and it does help our user groups, SQL Saturdays, and members thrive as a group.

I also want to say that I think PASS does lots of good things, and there are good people involved. Props for the good things, and I’ll make it a point to point them out more.

Now…

Every year we have a set of candidates for the PASS board, who will help guide the organization through the next few years. We have had board members who did  well, and board members who didn’t. Overall, the organization may move forward, or it may stall, but I haven’t really seen anyone damage PASS through their actions.

To be clear, I have liked most of the people who have served and consider most of them friends. I’d be happy to sit down and have a drink with most of them, and I think they all had the community’s best interests at heart. No one made decisions to maliciously hurt the organization. I thank them all for their volunteer time and efforts.

However let’s not confuse appreciation with acceptance. Your best intentions do not imply competence or success. Criticism is not a personal attack, but rather an understanding that the process and system have bugs. If you can’t handle that, don’t serve.

I’ve wandered a bit from my title, but for a reason. The process for allowing candidates has changed over time and while I think the NomCom served a purpose when it was created, I wonder if that’s the case now. I saw a note recently that candidates need to meet a minimum criteria, and then they are evaluated by the committee.

If someone passes the minimum criteria, shouldn’t they be on the ballot. That certainly hasn’t been the case, but really, why have a committee? It can serve no other purpose than to influence voting by ranking candidates or removing candidates from the process that the committee doesn’t like. That dislike can be for personal reasons, a non-disclosed issue about the candidate, or some reason they aren’t qualified, whatever that means.

However if I certify I will travel, if I can speak English, work with SQL Server, and if I have some volunteer record, then stick me on. Well, not me, but anyone else.

I know some people worry we might have 25 people running for 3 slots, and then oh no, what will we do? How can the voters decide? Listen, if we ever have 25 people running for 3 slots, I think that’s a good day in the community. I’d view that as a win, not as a problem.

The point I’d make is there are no real decisions being made by the board that require some special training that the board members somehow have. We entrust the running of many civic decisions to people with no real training in some area, and I see no reason why the PASS board is any different. Any reasonably intelligent DBA can listen to information, ask questions, and make a decision.

In fact, I’d argue that while everyone that has served on the board has worked in the technical field, and probably had some success, they aren’t necessarily qualified to lead a non-profit with $1m+ in revenue. At least not more qualified than you or any other member of the community.

Even me.

Let’s grow up a bit. Let’s recognize that the board is a part of the community, and keep it that way. If someone wants to run, meets the criteria, let them run. Anything else smacks of attempts to shape and control the organization in some way.

Any way, whether good or bad, is unnecessary.

Grant Fritchey is running for the PASS board. He’s not running for President, though I’m not sure why he shouldn’t be able to. The board makes decisions as a group and the President isn’t necessarily more or less powerful than other members. However the President can be the face of PASS and present an image that motivates others. Grant would be great here, and I’d like to see the President elected directly at some point in the future, without the nonsensical requirements they serve for multiple terms before then.

However that’s a separate discussion. In the next week, the election will take place and I’m voting for Grant. I’ve known him a long time, I’ve watched him work with the community, and I think he might be able to create some change in the organization.

For far too long, I think PASS has been stuck in a bureaucracy that acts out of fear rather than leadership, and I’d like to see that change. I wouldn’t blame any past or present board members as I think many of them are fine community members, but I think the organization has systemic problems that create issues. I’ll cease ranting about that, and no, I’m not going to attempt change myself. I did once, but I have neither the time nor inclination to fight those battles right now.

I’m voting for Grant. You can make your own decisions, but I am choosing Grant because he’s can create change. I’ll also vote for JRJ for the same reason. I think James has worked to create, and implement change, and I’d like to see him do more, especially in non-US areas.

I’m not sure who else I’d vote for, though I like both Wendy and Sri. I’m not sure what they’ve done, and I’d certainly like to get more information. That’s one of my complaints from all board members, is that they disclose too little information to the community.

However you vote, please take a minute and vote. We have an amazing community, and the more you participate, the better it gets.

Disclosure: Both Grant and I work for Red Gate Software, so take that for what it means to you. We’re also on the DBA Team together 😉

Power corrupts.

A famous quote, and it’s one of the the most true quotes I’ve seen in my life. When someone has power, they develop a sense of importance, their decisions seem to be more “correct” and their arrogance grows.

It’s a sign of being human, and we have try to build in checks and balances into our governments and corporations to limit the abuses of power. We’re not any more perfect than our systems, and we continue to see our systems, and people, fall down.

Being elected to a position confers power to an individual. It gives them responsibility, but it also seems to dull them in some way. The elected individual finds it harder to make the “right” decision, to stand up in an ethical way over time. It becomes common to justify their choices when they shouldn’t need to. A good ethical, moral decision shouldn’t need much justification; it should stand on its own, It’s the rare individual that can stand up for their beliefs in the face of criticism and follow their moral compass.

The organization that I was proud to join a decade ago as a professional working with SQL Server has completely fallen down for me in many ways, and the leaders elected to positions have time and time again chosen to set their ethics aside for various reasons.

“Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once its realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy. – Ron Paul “

We don’t have wealth, or perhaps even liberties involved with our professional organization, but we do have pride, or we should have pride, and once again I have none.

As the appointments were announced for the board of directors, I was not surprised, but saddened. An election was completed recently, with six people deciding to run, to devote their time and resources to serving the community.  Three were elected, by a narrow margin, and there were two resignations. With the election so recent, with so many others declining to volunteer for the board, one would think that it would be easy to appoint the fourth and fifth highest vote recipients to the board.

How easy would that be? These were people approved by the nomination committee, validated by the community and voted for. Apparently the board felt that the nomination committee and the community must not have good judgment.

Sri Sridharan, a friend, a volunteer, and an energetic worker on behalf of the Dallas community was not chosen. He has organized three SQL Saturdays, and was instrumental in bringing the SQL Rally to Dallas. He decided to run for the board of directors, something that few have done. Regardless of the qualifications of others, there is no argument that Sri is qualified for the board.

UPDATE (2012/1/16): To be clear, I do not argue that James Rowland-Jones or Kendal Van Dyke are qualified, and I have no complaint with their qualifications.

Apparently the board, led by its President, does not agree, and decided that someone the community wanted less, and someone that declined to run for the board, were better choices. I have no complaints against those appointed, but they did not deserve the position more so than Sri.

I can only look at this as an ethical lapse by the board, taking their personal feelings towards a candidate into consideration over qualifications and community support. All those directors that voted for these appointments fall into one of the failings of elected officials, and they certainly do not represent me.

It’s a sad day, one that has me viewing the organization as one that lacks professionalism, and simply an Association for SQL Server, without the P in front.

Sri, my friend, my apologies to you as a member of the SQL Server community, and I can only empathize with you, having been in a similar situation.