This is either a perfect or terrible analogy, depending on your point of view: Most churches (at least in Canada) have a central co-ordinating authority, but the central co-ordinating does no direct fund raising, they get all their fund indirectly through the various congregations. If CLUE can fund raise through the various LUGs, it can kill two birds with one stone:
1. It prevents the splitting of funds at the local level (charity begins at home) 2. It makes sure that the local lugs are made aware of CLUE and that there is grassroots support for its activities. Ian On Sat, 2002-07-27 at 16:57, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > IMO this is problematic as it runs in direct competiton with LUGs which > themselves charge dues (ie, Vancouver). We could be seen as trying to cut > into their revenue. > > - Evan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
