On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, Rick Moen <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, thank you. I do value your good opinion, you know.
Thanks. > Just to briefly reiterate a small passing point I made earlier: _If_ > there might be any concern such as Daniel had, IMO a sufficient > safeguard is to keep the LUG's key assets in private (and trusted) > hands. Generally, a LUG's sole essential asset is ownership over its > Internet domain. > > So, if MyLUG comes to regret its association several years back with > BigEvil, Ltd. and has taken that one precaution, in my experience it > then has all it needs to, if necessary, walk away from BigEvil, Ltd. and > reformulate itself without the affiliation. > > Seems to me, if you do that, all the other angst and paranoia is no > longer a concern. Just an idea. That is one idea. However the debian.org domain is owned by SPI so when Debian went down that path of separating financial and technical issues they put the domain in the financial side. The tech contact for debian.org is within Debian but the admin contact is with SPI. But given the typical AGM attendance, a group of 16 people could stage a hostile take-over of LUV and do whatever they want with DNS names etc. The greater voting numbers for LA act as protection against such things. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
