begin quoting Neil Schneider as of Tue, May 10, 2005 at 06:10:18PM -0700: > > Stewart Stremler said: > > begin quoting John H. Robinson, IV as of Tue, May 10, 2005 at > > 02:50:30PM -0700: > > [snip] > >> Now, if elections are postponed until after the SDMUG separation, > >> then > >> things get interesting. As Neil pointed out, board members must > >> remain > >> members of a SDCS. There are a few ways to be an SDCS member. One is > >> regular membership, the other is via membership via a SIG. I would > >> tend > >> to read that everyone is a member via a SIG, unless dues were paid > >> directly to the SDCS. There are also lifetime, honourary, and > >> corporate > >> members. These I do not think apply to the current set of SDCS Board > >> members. > > > > Paying the local SIG for a "year membership" in SDCS and then losing > > that membership when the SIG leaves would seem to be a bad thing to > > do... either prorate the membership and issue a refund, or leave 'em > > be as members until the membership expires. > > IMNSHO SDMUG has gotten all the special breaks they deserve. A little
I'm not talking about special breaks. I'm talking about doing the right thing, so WE can keep the high ground. I like the feeling of being the one on a white charger (and with a matching hat to boot!). > history lesson is in order. SDMUG was given special dispensation, > allowing them to pay only $6 per member, from the $30 they collected, > to SDCS. This was by a special amendment to the SDCS bylaws. SDMUG was > allowed to use the remaining $24 per member to publish their MAC > magazine. SDCS had trouble even collecting the $6 per member from > SDMUG. This was before KPLUG had the big membership drive? > Then SDMUG stopped publishing their magazine, because the > member who was producing it quit. Suddenly SDMUG's treasury ballooned, > since they were no longer spending large sums to produce a slick > covered MAC magazine. By rights, they should have started paying SDCS > dues of $30/year like all the other SIG members did. Okay. But instead, everyone had their dues reduced to $6/year. That seems to be a fair solution to THAT issue. > Instead they staged a coup, took over SDCS. All legal, I personally > certified the election. Then they changed the rules to allow > themselves to seperate from SDCS and take the treasury, which by law > belongs to SDCS, with them. I recall that being a concern of ours as well. I have no problems with them taking their treasury with them, so long as nobody else's is diminished. If they try to take more than what they "own", then there is a huge problem. [snip] > > Avoiding fireworks would be a very nice thing to do. > > If there are fireworks, the board has only themselves to blame. I'd rather it not be us waving around a lit match... that's all. :) -Stewart
pgpEbxsiUvfhh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-steer
