> imho, we _DO_ need to have an AGM to attempt to decide whether we want the > CLUG to become a formal entity, or revert to a strictly mailing-list > affair, or indeed something in between, i.e. carry on as we are.
Well, if people want to be all formal and move motions and what have you, I doubt I shall attend, that's just no fun :-P However I will (hopefully be able to) continue to read and post on this fine mailing list, without belonging to or participating in such an organisation. So you have two sets of people - one set who belong to / participate in this formal organisation, who are a subset of the set of people who read and post to this mailing list. (perhaps not strictly, there may be others, but for all intents and purposes). Even if the only difference between the two sets is myself ;-) Now, seeing as the mailing list people (the superset) currently seem to call themselves "CLUG", I think it would be sensible for the formal organisation to call themselves something else, to avoid confusion. Hopefully I'm not reiterating what Nick said too much here. I just want to ask, why do we need a CLUG AGM for that? If there are people around who want to form such an organisation, they should organise it. Let them post details on the list, and maybe some of us will be convinced to join them (I was just using myself as an example up there, I might actually be quite interested in such an idea). Or you could do this as a "clug thing", have an AGM, convert CLUG to some kind of more formal organisation / community trust or whatever -- I'll just say I'm a member of the "linux users mailing list" instead :-) I hope I make my point. "CLUG" only exists as a name in our heads, and a small amount of funds (it's only asset I believe?). The official "CLUG committee" should primarily manage that asset and the activites related to it. Beyond that it's all just playing with names. Cheers, Gareth
