Re: Summer Summit 2006 Notes
On Aug 14, 2006, at 11:44, Bill Sconce wrote: like Debian is the organization we all know and love and the legal entity is SPI. That distinction would/might defuse some of these concerns. We might also talk to the folks at SPI to see how they structure things. Legal code reuse, if you will. -Bill - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833 Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/ VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
Re: Summer Summit 2006 Notes
On 8/14/06, Bill Sconce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think because wikis (and mailing lists) LOVE never-ending discussions about how the law works ... ... as do face-to-face meetings, as I believe our meeting this past Saturday demonstrated. We burned an hour (plus or minus) speculating about the law, when none of us are really in a position to make well-informed statements about it. :-) ... this determinination should be shunted off to a legal-committee task force to just come back with the answers, dammit. Agreed, completely. We need to seek professional advice on this one. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
Re: Summer Summit 2006 Notes
Ben Scott wrote: On 8/14/06, Bill Sconce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think because wikis (and mailing lists) LOVE never-ending discussions about how the law works ... ... as do face-to-face meetings, as I believe our meeting this past Saturday demonstrated. We burned an hour (plus or minus) speculating about the law, when none of us are really in a position to make well-informed statements about it. :-) ... this determinination should be shunted off to a legal-committee task force to just come back with the answers, dammit. Agreed, completely. We need to seek professional advice on this one. Professional?! I think GNHLUG still has $35 to its name. Well, with interest over the past 3 years, its probably $37. I think. Any volunteers? Also: maddog... Has LI made any progress on this front? --Bruce ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
Re: Legal issues with incorporation (was: Summer Summit 2006 Notes)
Ben Scott wrote: On 8/14/06, Bruce Dawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think GNHLUG still has $35 to its name. It does?!? You've been hoarding funds, then! ;-) Not me! The duly appointed treasurer has them (who I'm not sure is still aware that she's the treasurer.) I haven't checked with her on this, but those funds could easily have gone into communal beer purchases at Martha's. ;-) --Bruce (Why does this organization have such difficulty with due-diligence) Dawson ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
Re: Summer Summit 2006 Notes
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 11:44:17 -0400 Bill Sconce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jim's comments/scenario, according to my notes: 1. GNHLUG is a corporation. 2. Someone (Martha's, say) lets GNHLUG LLC. have a meeting upstairs. First, I suspect I will regret not keeping a personal promise to avoid this issue. Second, I will be out of town from Wed through Sunday and again for the fist two weeks of Sept. so I'm unlikely to actively participate in this debate regardless. Third, I have not read the notes, etc. Fourth, I am replying to Bill's message, but this is not directed at him That said, a few points. Nobody in their right mind would register/form GNLUG as an LLC so I don't know why there is a discussion of GNHLUG, LLC. I'll explain if anyone wants the long story, but I think we have been over that. I believe the issue is whether a voluntary association should be formed with the name of GNHLUG. As such it would be considered a not for profit organization and the general rules which apply to corporations would generally apply to GNHLUG. If it applied for recognition as a non-profit by the IRS, then it would be a tax exempt organization as well. That is really optional. While anyone can go search and find stuff on the web, I suggest the concept of piercing the corporate veil, etc. would simply be inapplicable to a voluntary association and all the stuff of that ilk are red herrings. So some want to leave it the way it is which is those who volunteer their time and money will be rewarded with unquestionable personal liability for anything that happens by any activity of GNHLUG such as the hypothetical given. Nice. And those of this view are doing what for GNHLUG aside from raising objections? There are a myriad clubs of every conceivable nature happily humming along in NH and nearly all of them of any substance are voluntary associations/non-profits. Do you really believe they would be and could survive if the list of horribles that are raised every time this subject is discussed within GNHLUG were the impediments some say? BTW, anyone taken the time to actually go to an insurance agent and obtain a quote for insuring a non-for profit association? I find this matter very tiresome and assume that someone will simply go file the papers and the malcontents can complain in the wilderness to their heart's content. Its like who is the next fearless leader and nomination /voting. Huh? On what basis does anyone think there is a right to nominate or vote or have any say. There is no framework to provide any of those things. Just to be clear, I have no interest in engaging in a debate about this, nor in responding to erroneous legal conclusions relating to non-profit corporations. I have a life. Ed Lawson ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
Re: Summer Summit 2006 Notes
On 8/14/06, Ed Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I don't know why there is a discussion of GNHLUG, LLC ... The only time I've seen mention of GNHLUG LLC is in Bill Sconce's post. I suspect this is Bill's error. I find this matter very tiresome and assume that someone will simply go file the papers and the malcontents can complain in the wilderness to their heart's content. This is what comes from people unfamiliar with the law presuming to speak about it. (I include myself in this admonishment.) I suspect, had we (we being the people there this Saturday) had the sense to table the discussion until someone with a clue about law (i.e., Ed) could answer, the whole discussion would have gone something like this: Random member: Don't we have to carry insurance to maintain liability protections? Person-with-clue: No, that's completely bogus. Random member: But-- Everyone: Are you a lawyer? Random member: Well, no-- Everyone: Well, person-with-clue is. Sit down and shut up. Alas, there's very little lay people like to speculate more on than law. Speaking for myself: If you, Ed, say the objection is bogus, I'm willing to take your word for it. You're in a position to know. I don't think anyone else here really is. I know I'm certainly not. Its like who is the next fearless leader and nomination /voting. Huh? On what basis does anyone think there is a right to nominate or vote or have any say. Courtesy alone. Tongue-in-cheek: Given that we don't have a defined organization, or a defined position for the leadership role, it does seem at least consistent, if not appropriate, to abide by an undefined process for choosing the next undefined leader. More seriously: The only thing which currently creates anything which can be labeled GNHLUG is consensus and general approval. Any nomination, selection, or election which occurs would therefore take place under those terms (ill-defined as they are). In point of fact, it would be just as (in)valid for Ted to appoint himself dictator-for-life. That, however, would likely be seen as bad by others. Given our lack of formal rules, all we can do is attempt to muddle through as best we can. That is the only thing my nomination was intended to accomplish. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
Re: Summer Summit 2006 Notes
Ben Scott wrote: On 8/14/06, Ed Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I find this matter very tiresome and assume that someone will simply go file the papers and the malcontents can complain in the wilderness to their heart's content. ... Tongue-in-cheek: Given that we don't have a defined organization, or a defined position for the leadership role, it does seem at least consistent, if not appropriate, to abide by an undefined process for choosing the next undefined leader. ... Not tongue-in-cheek: Since we are currently an undefined non-corporation, I move that the FearlessLeader (whoever s/he is at the moment this action is taken) take the corporate papers as they currently exist and get them signed by whoever FearlessLeader feels is appropriate and forthwith submit them to the Secretary of State. And if monies are needed to do this, let the gnhlug-org list know. As it currently stands, it doesn't matter who does it since we're not an incorporated entity. Note: This means Daryl McBride, or Bill Gates, or even (sigh) $FAVORITE_VILLAIN could do it - whether we want him to or not. The first one to the Secretary of State wins the option to incorporate GNHLUG, and there's not a [EMAIL PROTECTED] thing anyone can do about it. I'm just afraid that someone has done it already. Do I hear a second? --Bruce ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
Re: Summer Summit 2006 Notes
I second it. David Berube Berube Consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] (603)-485-9622 http://www.berubeconsulting.com/ Bruce Dawson wrote: Ben Scott wrote: On 8/14/06, Ed Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I find this matter very tiresome and assume that someone will simply go file the papers and the malcontents can complain in the wilderness to their heart's content. ... Tongue-in-cheek: Given that we don't have a defined organization, or a defined position for the leadership role, it does seem at least consistent, if not appropriate, to abide by an undefined process for choosing the next undefined leader. ... Not tongue-in-cheek: Since we are currently an undefined non-corporation, I move that the FearlessLeader (whoever s/he is at the moment this action is taken) take the corporate papers as they currently exist and get them signed by whoever FearlessLeader feels is appropriate and forthwith submit them to the Secretary of State. And if monies are needed to do this, let the gnhlug-org list know. As it currently stands, it doesn't matter who does it since we're not an incorporated entity. Note: This means Daryl McBride, or Bill Gates, or even (sigh) $FAVORITE_VILLAIN could do it - whether we want him to or not. The first one to the Secretary of State wins the option to incorporate GNHLUG, and there's not a [EMAIL PROTECTED] thing anyone can do about it. I'm just afraid that someone has done it already. Do I hear a second? --Bruce ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
Re: Summer Summit 2006 Notes
Bill Sconce wrote: The discussion was about Inc. Incorporating as GNHLUG, Inc. Nobody would do that either. A voluntary association or not for profit corporation under NH law is in many ways a corporation and the corporations laws generally apply, but technically it is not a corporation in the normal sense of the word. Larabee's wife is someone who knows this stuff inside out as it is her day job as I remember and was responsible as a watch dog when the last set of docs was created to formally create the not for profit corporation. Ed Lawson Ed Lawson ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
Summer Summit 2006 Notes
Folks: Thanks to all for their participation in the summit yesterday. I've started some notes on the wiki at: http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Organizational/ SummerSummit2006Notes Please edit/correct/append and fix. Thanks! Ted Roche Ted Roche Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
Re: Summer Summit 2006 Notes
On 8/13/06, Bruce Dawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ted: Thanks for writing that up; those of us out in the hinterlands find your effort and this information priceless. And those of us who were there, do, too! Not only is my memory not perfect, I believe a permanent record of our proceedings is critical for any number of reasons. Thanks, Ted! I also saw the note about David Berube stepping down as CentraLUG leader. I believe he was also the GNHLUG FearlessLeader, is anyone going to step into that role? (Or is that role now considered unnecessary?) The consensus appears to be that it *IS* necessary. Also, I don't believe liability is an individual's concern ... There are those who disagree. We decided to postpone further speculation, as NOUAL (None Of Us Are Lawyers). Ed Lawson's presence was sorely missed at this meeting; we're a bunch of blind men trying to figure out what the elephant is. PS: I'm CC-ing everyone on the original message because I don't know who is on the -org list and who isn't. (If you attended the meeting, *I* believe you should be on the -org list.) I checked the subscription list. The only person not on the -org list is (I believe) Jim Kuzdrall. (He might be sub'ed at an address I don't know.) -- Ben ___ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
