Lev, you say that this will be discussed at the AGM, yet the rest of your email
(beginning "what will change") reads as though disincorporation is a decided
matter.
Personally I much rather prefer a decentralised, horizontal structure and more
powerful localised bodies and do not see any worthwhile regional or personal
gain from such a merger.
Having said that, MLUG will no doubt fit that model very well and be there to
carry on for a local group of people more interested in Linux fun than
political overhead.
Also, I can't make it physically to the AGM (and tbh don't feel all that
strongly on the subject to sit through a committee meeting), but will there be
a participatory webinar feed?
Daniel
Lev Lafayette <[email protected]> wrote:
>In a few weeks, Linux Users of Victoria, Inc., will be holding another
>Annual General Meeting. But this one is somewhat different to others.
>At
>this meeting, the very existence of LUV as an independent organisation
>may
>come to an end. A motion is on the agenda that LUV dis-incorporates and
>merges into Linux Australia, Inc., as a subcommittee of that group. It
>is
>an issue which I personally have given some serious thought to over the
>past several months, and more fleeting consideration over the past few
>years.
>
>LUV is one of the the oldest (since 1993), most active (three speakers
>per
>month), and largest (c1500 members) Linux organisations in the world.
>We
>have been a mainstay behind such events as Software Freedom Day,
>install-fests, regional mini-conferences, and of course, our regular
>beginners workshops and technical talks. All of this, one hastens to
>add,
>will not change at all with the proposed dis-incorporation.
>
>What will change is that LUV will not be an independent organisation.
>Our
>assets, such as they are, will be transferred to Linux Australia, in
>accordance to the Act governing Incorporated Associations in Victoria.
>Our
>income and expenditure will also be legally part of Linux Australia as
>well, although that body has indicated that there is some room for
>autonomy in those areas. At the very least, Linux events in Victoria
>that
>require funding could go directly to the national body, rather than to
>the
>state one which tends to have somewhat more meagre financial resources.
>An
>example would be the establishment of more regional chapters.
>
>We will be part of a national organisation and will be able to have
>more
>direct input into country-wide affairs, including national policy, as
>they
>are related to Linux. Our administrative overhead, which it is admitted
>is
>not particularly onerous, should also decline. Plus, there are
>significant
>economies of scale and of network scope in being part of a larger
>group.
>One also hopes that we will see people who have hitherto been more
>involved in Linux Australia from Victoria, participating in activities
>of
>the Victorian subcommittee of LA.
>
>Overall however, it must be noted that Linux Australia is a unitary
>body,
>not a federal one. Members of the committee of Linux Australia are
>elected
>from the membership as a whole, not as nominees from the respective
>subcommittees and, as subcommittees only exist with the approval of the
>LA
>committee, they could be disbanded in part or entirely, at any time.
>The
>circumstances that this would arise would indeed be quite
>extraordinary,
>but it is certainly something that must be considered.
>
>I admit that I am much more in favour of bottom-up, federalist
>organisations (e.g., a national committee from regional LUGs), rather
>than
>those of the unitary model (e.g., a national organisation with local
>subcommittees). I also acknowledge the substantial benefits that arise
>through being part of a larger organisations. Whilst Linux Australia is
>a
>product of its own history and perhaps does not represent what I
>consider
>the most optimal organisational structure, especially for an interest
>which is primarily the result of of the energy of local volunteer
>activists. There is of course the possibility that LA may consider
>changing its organisational structure over time.
>
>Still, if this does mean the end of LUV, Inc. we can certainly be very
>proud of what has been achieved under our name in the past twenty
>years.
>LUV was there, from the very beginning of Linux, when a rag-tag team of
>wild-eyed volunteer coders declared that they could take on the
>massive,
>multi-billion dollar proprietary operating systems, by opening the code
>to
>all, by making it free to modify and to distribute, and produce
>something
>that was technically superior by any meaningful metric. That was truly
>revolutionary.
>
>LUV, Inc.? You're a superstar.
>
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_zLBsRYD8w
>
>
>--
>Lev Lafayette, BA (Hons), GCertPM, MBA
>mobile: 0432 255 208
>RFC 1855 Netiquette Guidelines
>http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt
>
>_______________________________________________
>luv-main mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
luv-main mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
