Daniel Jitnah <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 2013-09-02 at 00:15 +1000, Les Kitchen wrote: > Hi Les, > > > > Oh, about your (Daniel's) LA-linkup resolution: I was going to > > post to luv-main, but I'm too tired to start a new mail message, > > so I'll just dump my thoughts here. I like the spirit of your > > motion, but I'm just worried that it's not debugged yet, and we > > won't be able to even do a proper code walk-through before > > Tuesday. This is true, and it's an important reason for my voting against the disincorporation resolution: rejecting that resolution now gives Luv time to explore the alternatives fully. > In this proposal, all the details are of course the subject of > discussion between interested parties and Member contribution will be > welcome. The actual agreement if we get there will be agreed to by LA > and LUV. Consistent with the spirit, I will suggest that the LA rep > will be appointed by LA and up to them how they decide who that person > may be.
That seems reasonable to me. If Luv exists after Tuesday (as an incorporated body), these and other details can be worked through. _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
