On Thu, 25 Jun 2015, Josh Smift wrote:
DJB> Sorry, no, it's about the money that's not seeing optimal value, not
DJB> money in my wallet.
Money is fungible: If you want other organizations to have $100 more to
spend on good purposes, why does it matter whether they get that $100 from
you after LOPSA gives you a refund, or from LOPSA directly after they shut
down operations (should you be so fortunate as to somehow destroy the
organization while they still have a bunch of money to distribute to other
organizations), or from you after David Lang gives it to you?
If you want USENIX to have an extra $100, getting David Lang to give you a
hundred bucks (which you can then give to USENIX) seems to me like much
more of a sure thing than trying to liquidate LOPSA and give some of the
proceeds to USENIX. The plan you suggested for doing that earlier doesn't
seem to me like it has any chance at all of working. If I were in your
shoes, I'd take the sure money and get out while the getting's good.
He's saying that he wants to make sure that I don't give any more money to LOPSA
because he sees it as being wasted. So as long as anyone is giving money to
LOPSA, he's going to keep campaigning against it.
Which shows that it's not about his pre-paid membership.
David Lang
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
http://lopsa.org/
