On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 10:58:48AM -0700, Neil Schneider wrote:
> 
> 
> I agree that it's not worth a fight. However, there may be questions
> about the use of the SDCS treasury, by the current board, to
> facilitate the secession of SDMUG. It is incumbant upon them to show
> that they didn't violate their fiduciary duties to SDCS during their
> tenure on the board. This needs to be done before the secession is
> completed. I'm afraid afterwards is too late. I personally think this
> needs to be done by an third party, to provide transparency.
> 

Agreed, but even if we find that they spent $XXX from SDCS on their
succession (and I kind of doubt that they did[0]), then I would be happy
just to deduct $XXX from what is returned to them, no harm/no foul.

[0] I do, however, expect that they will immediately reimburse
themselves for their "private" contributions to SDMUG's incorporation
from the SDMUG treasury. Since (as one SDMUG member pointed out) they
took all this action without informing or consulting with their
membership, one could make a case that that was sleazy if not illegal.
But it is also strictly a SDMUG affair, and I can't be bothered with it.

-- 
Lan Barnes                    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux Guy, SCM Specialist     858-354-0616

-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-steer

Reply via email to