I’d like to make one thing clear: I am very happy the OCF exists, if for no other reason than that I use the model of the OCF as a proof of concept for a functional, student-run computing service network whenever I pitch similar ideas to the USCA. It’s an organization run entirely on volunteers and donations, providing a service completely free of charge for which they could easily charge, and continue to support users who have long since graduated.
What seems to be amazing to so many people is that the organization is student-run. I have a lot of trouble understanding exactly why that is. None of the physical resources they have are particularly inaccessible to them because they are college students, and the environment here seems to be conducive to the particular pool of human resources the OCF requires. For some reason, however, there seems to be a mistrust of empowering and employing in positions with real responsibility where it can be avoided, particularly in the USCA. I have consistently argued that the OCF is proof that there is no inherent danger in entrusting responsibility to students, and the result of that empowerment is typically far more accessible to the locality than anything a big company provides.
For me, this does not excuse a lack of professionalism in procedure. As I understand it, I have made a few folks at the OCF a bit unhappy for saying so. But even though you have no paying customers, it undermines your credibility if things go wrong and they don’t get fixed in a transparent manner. I am happy with all the changes the OCF has made to correct this, but I still believe my criticisms (not my rants, mind you) warranted merit. Particularly because I had entrusted my coursework to the reliability of the OCF. At this point in my experience, I couldn’t be happier that I stayed with them. They addressed all my needs/complaints directly. I look forward to continue using them as the case study for functional student operations.
