On Thursday 07 April 2005 14:04, Jarrod Major wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Jarrod Major > > > > > > I figured I would take the opportunity to break this out as it has little > > to > > do with CUUG's upcoming events. > > One of the things the past Executive's strove for with CLUG was > consistency. We wanted to provide as much of it as possible. What this > means is we consistently meet at the same place at the same time each > month. This means that membership is decided at the outset and doesn't > waffle all over the place over time. People know what to expect. The CLUG > website as a communication tool is there consistently. > > While change is good and discussion of change is not bad. Change for the > sake of change is not necessarily good. Wow, that bordered on some > *Adamsian logic there for a second :)
Totally Agree. > > What I am trying to say is that a lot of energy is spent by people in this > group over trivial matters. I constantly have to ask what the motivation > behind something is. It seems to me that there are a lot of suggestions on > things that are not broken. The majority of our members do not have a > problem with the membership system we have. We do retain a majority of > members from year to year in renewals. There is always a good number of > Tier Two members who come to meetings and InstallFests. I often wonder what > is going through people's minds when they suggest something. To them it is > the greatest thing since sliced bread, to me it's just another kind of > sliced bread, no better, no worse. I have come to the realization that some people will take a deliberately extreme or contrary view with the sole intent of sparking vigorous debate, such persons feel this is healthy and a necessary part of a democratic proccess. I think they might be right. However, until I realized this and sometimes even now when I forget, such activities could and sometimes still do infuriate me. Of course some are just trolling but I feel we have VERY few of those on the list. > > So the conclusion that came to the past Executive is that the system works > and there appeared to be no reason to change it. Of course this > determination is now up to the current and future Executives and the > members of the group. If this is an issue you feel strongly about, pay your > $20 and start a campaign to abolish the fee, maybe others feel as you do... > then again maybe they don't. My own vote for the moment is pretty much status quo. See below. > > And as I am having to remind people, I am NO LONGER and Executive, so you > can politely tell me to go to hell. Keep in mind, I don't have to watch my > P's and Q's either and I am more likely to speak my mind now that I am not > fettered by being politically correct. > > *Douglas Adams, author of the Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy RIP ******************************** CLUG needs, for various reasons Jaarod previously mentioned to have a "reasonable" cash flow and enough of a cushion in the bank to pay for "a rainy day" My own feeling is that $20 is a very affordable amount for a membership, I view the point about not allowing the tier 1 members the vote more from the point of view that we place almost NO restrictions on Tier 1 membership, should we just allow anyone off the street to decide where our club is going? I don't mean to belittle Tier 1 members but just for example, if someone wanted to screw up a vote he could just persuade a group of friends to walk into a meeting with him and vote for whatever they want, Currently, if you stumble into a monthly meeting by accident and sit down, you are in effect, a Tier 1 member. (This is an example of what I said earlier about stating an extreme view, I feel I should announce this so as NOT to antagonize people ) I really don't think a yearly due of $20 is very much at all and can be easily recouped by anyone interested in the subject at hand by doing a book review. Eventually, assuming the current and future executives are prudent and we continue as we have this can build to a respectable sum, particularly if we are successful in obtaining Charitable status. Then the question arises of what to do with it. A similar point was reached in another group I used to belong to and someone came up with the point we could buy or rent our own facilities, I would like us as a group to consider this. NOT in the IMMEDIATE future and not until the membership is of a size that the cash flow is sufficient to allow it. It was pointed out that if we succeed in obtaining Charitable Status we can qualify for fund matching from the government so this is not as impossible as it may seem at the moment. What would we do with such a facility? examples include allowing those less fortunate access to computers and internet for training and resume writing, standing facility for frequent installfests, demo facilities for local firms and organizations interested in Linux and Open Source in general, refurbishing computers for low income families and so on. Currently we are very fortunate in our arrangements with DeVry and before that with SAIT but having our own "clubhouse" opens up many more possibilities....... I am NOT saying this IS the way we HAVE to go, and to be honest, I am a little nervous about the prospect, but it is something to think about as a possible future for CLUG. Graham _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [email protected] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
