Neil Schneider wrote:
Do you have a point? I was only trying to argue that SDMUG needed no special dispensation. They've been in charge, they made the rules, if they disociate themselves from SDCS and don't get the full value of their $6 it's not our doing.
Agreed, no significant point beyond that.
When were the bylaws ratified? I don't remember and Gus seems unable to find the announcement in his extensive archives. The SIG Guidelines can be changed by the board, but not the bylaws. I suspect the reason they didn't just leave last September is that it takes some time to get 501c(3) status from the IRS. I just spoke to Greg Skalka on the phone, and UCHUG is going through the process. They are still waiting for the IRS ruling.
I didn't attend, but per my records the bylaws should have been ratified on February 2, 2005. First, in the 12/29/04 board meeting we have this snippet from the minutes:
---
"Claude suggested that we do nothing with the SDCS bylaws. The SIG guidelines cover our activities. A committee of three was formed to review the SDMUG by-laws and SDCS bylaws to make sure there are no gross conflicts with the SDCS SIG guidelines. If there are not, we will change neither. If there are, we will agree on any needed revisions at the next meeting. The committee is: Daly, Rory, and Mike.
"By the February general meeting we will have approved the by-laws by e-mail to all members, and in March, the membership can ratify any changes at the general meeting."
---
It appears the committee did decide to change the bylaws, because I have an email from [EMAIL PROTECTED], sent on 1/16/2005, saying:
--- "A vote to ratify the new SDCS Bylaws will be held on February 2, 2005.
"The vote will take place at the San Diego Macintosh User Group meeting, held at the Ramada Inn in San Diego.
"You may review the new Bylaws here: http://www.sdcs.org/bylaws
"Please review the Bylaws and be at the meeting by 6:30pm to cast your vote." ---
You may not have attended, but I'm pretty darn sure the SDMUG membership rubber stamped whatever was presented. There should of course be record of this somewhere, and I'm sure Claude or Daly would be happy to provide it if asked.
If it's rocky it's because they have made it so. What really concerns me is that non-members of SDCS will be running the board. They have proven to me they have only their own interests in mind, and have contempt for the other SIGs. I don't want people with that mind-set running SDCS. I no longer trust them.
I don't see, at least yet, how they're making it rocky. They want to leave. They happen to be in charge. The by-laws don't really address this situation. We have to all be adults and figure out a way to smoothly transition them out. They're willing to help. We shouldn't make it too difficult for them to do so. And I don't see where they have contempt for the other SIGs.
--j
-- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-steer
