tl;dr – I’m voting for Grant, James, and Wendy.
There are 3 open spots, and 4 people running. This means you have to pick one person who won’t get in.
I’m a data guy, so I made a spreadsheet of what’s important to me:
When I elect somebody to a volunteer position, I want to know what they accomplish. Ideally, they blog and tweet about what they’re doing, but I understand that not everybody likes to communicate that way. Just in case, I also read the PASS Board of Directors meeting minutes looking for what they’ve accomplished. Finally, I read their election profiles to see what BoD accomplishments they’re proud of.
I gotta be honest: I had a really tough time deciphering what the 3 incumbents have done this year. That alone is a big problem, and it means I’m 100% sold on giving Grant a vote. He’s a communicator and a bridge-builder – if anybody can bring transparency to PASS, it’s Grant.
As to the incumbents, I know JRJ was heavily involved in SQLbits, and I’ve written about what a kick-ass job they’re doing of growing the global community. I’m sold on giving JRJ another vote.
Wendy made a list of what she’s done in her election profile, so she gets my last vote.
It’s absolutely nothing against Sri – I’m sure he’s a great guy doing great things – but I just don’t know what they are.
14 Comments. Leave new
Great insight Brent.
James, Wendy and Grant too get my vote and this article cemented my thoughts.
I agree that it is difficult to establish what each has done for PASS. My relationship with James at SQLBits has enabled me to see much of his efforts around Global growth.
Grant is especially talented at reaching out to all people from all walks of life. I especially like his aim to reach out to wider audience to educate about the benefits of PASS and the training provided. He should get a shot on the board to give him the opportunity.
And Wendy’s aim to reach out to the rising pool of professionals from higher education is a great focus point for extending the reach and sustaining it.
Sri’s campaign should not be ignored as he strives for greater engagement within the existing membership, but I feel I have got more of a sense of what Wendy and James has done in PASS, and want to give Grant a chance
Its going to be a difficult vote regardless and good luck to all candidates involved
Chris – thanks sir! I agree, it’s easier to see JRJ’s involvement if you’ve attended SQLbits. It’s such an incredible event.
Was keeping Summit in one extreme corner of the lower 48 a good thing or a bad thing?
Andrew – I purposely left my opinion out of that to let folks make that decision for themselves. I’d say a bad thing.
“I’m sure [Sri]’s a great guy doing great things – but I just don’t know what they are.”
Communication. Communication. Communication. This should be the Board mantra. I’m voting for Grant over Sri as well – fresh energy.
By the way….. too bad that we are only looking at 4 candidates for 3 spots. 🙁
Anne
Anne – yep, exactly. Do good things, tell people – brilliant advice that works everywhere.
Hey Brent,
Firstly, thank you for the vote of confidence. I appreciate and value your support.
I accept the criticism re: my lack of visibility. That is very fair and something I will strive to improve upon moving forward. I also take that feedback for what it is – constructive guidance on being a better representative for the community.
However, I do feel it is important to state that people should vote for me based on my contribution to PASS not for my community contributions generally. Your support and advocacy for SQLBits is greatly appreciated and I was delighted when I read your review of our most recent event. However, I think it is important that we separate the my role in the two groups during the election process. After all this role is for PASS.
Thanks again for taking the time to air and share your perspective, JRJ
JRJ – thanks for all you do! I do have to say, though, that I vote for people based on their track record of what they do. I’m voting for Grant based on his track record of communication even though he’s not blogging for PASS, and I’m voting for you based on your track record of community building even though it’s not just happening at PASS. Actions speak louder than words, and you’ve got a great history of actions.
[…] like to take something like this scorecard that Brent Ozar did and maintain it in real […]
Why is it that nearly 6 months after having left my previous job I find Brent more likeable and likeable
I am wondering how many people just voted how Brent them told us without any further thought. Why think when Brent does that for us. I would have voted for Grant regardless. He has lots of constructive criticism for PASS on his blog and twitter.
HAHAHAHA
There’s so many ways to help the community as a volunteer. The way I’ve chosen is to spend 30-60 minutes a day staying current with the community, then doing what I can to recap/summarize/editorialize the issues in a way that people can consume with little time and effort.
In the SQL Server community, we don’t have the luxury of employed journalists and analysts who get paid to do that kind of thing. We have to step up and take that role ourselves.
When I was president of PASS, I required the board members to do a monthly 360 degree evaluation of each other. The criteria wasn’t “how good of a job is board member X doing”, it was “how good of a job is board member X doing in communicating about their job”? Other important criteria included how frequently you participated in the discussion, whether you missed meetings, and whether you answered your email. Those are all criteria related to how you communicate.
FWIW, it’s important to point out that when I was president, we barely had Facebook and Twitter was brand new as I was leaving the presidency. So you only had to communicate in person, email, blog, or via phone.
The idea was that, as volunteers, we didn’t work like full-time employees. We had babies and mortgages and family situations. So it was very possible that you could be working very hard or could be otherwise thwarted in making progress. But that was ok. The key was were you TELLING people you wouldn’t be making progress?
The board self-evaluations were not continued after my term as president.
Kevin – ouch, that’s sad about self-evaluations not being continued. I miss the good old days. Specifically, the days when you were President.