[In reply to Petros <[email protected]>] Hi Peter,
> to be honest I am sometimes surprised about arguments arising from > formal/legal matters. ... I think you have a pretty good take on the situation. Fundamentally, we're all Linux enthusiasts, and what we mainly want to do is use and promote Linux in Victoria -- not spend a lot of time debating finer points of organizational structure and process. Generally we all work together effectively and respectfully and enthusiastically, and don't really need formal rules to do that every day. But we are a group of people, and it's possible for differences to arise, and it's possible for people to act badly. So we need to have -- most of the time in the background -- an agreed-upon framework of rules to work within, so we can resolve disputes when they arise, and make decisions when we can't practically reach consensus, and so members know what their rights and responsibilities are, and what processes to follow. And we need some legal status, so LUV can have a bank account and such. Almost all the time, the formal structures should just sit in the background, while we get on with what we want to do. But from time to time, they need attention, like with the upcoming AGM, where I guess the main question is whether we continue with our current underlying formal structure as an incorporated association under Victoria law, or switch to a formal structure where we're a subcommittee of Linux Australia (which is a registered non-profit organization incorporated under NSW law). > I am a club committee member of a ski club (Melbourne Nordic) with an > ancient constitution, printed on a typewriter if I remember correctly. > > A while ago some legal rules changed (don't ask me for the right term, ... Yeah, it's a similar situation with LUV as with your ski club. The Victorian government changed the legislation last year, and (as I understand it) existing associations have until November this year to fit in with the new legislation. > As far as I understand joining LA and running LUV as a regional > informal group is suggested to: ... > - Everybody gets counted, LA has more weight advocating Open Source if > there are xy members more ... Generally, I agree with all the points you raise (though I might give them different weights). However, I will make a comment on your last point: There's nothing to stop people from joining both LA and LUV. In fact, many LUV members are also LA members. And this discussion has been a reminder to me that I should join LA myself. It's something I've been intending to do for a while, but it tends to slip. True confession, I was going along to LUV meetings for more than a year before I signed up properly as a member. So, the way to boost LA membership is to join LA. It doesn't require any change to LUV. Maybe we should, though, remind LUV members from time to time of the option of joining LA as well. I'm posting to luv-main just as an ordinary LUV member, expressing my own personal opinions, *not* in any official capacity as LUV secretary. -- Smiles, Les. _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
