On 4/09/13 9:30 AM, Jason White wrote:
Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au> wrote:
If this issue comes up again next year, I think we really need to have a carefully researched document (e.g. a FAQ), which is checked by Linux Australia for correctness, and updated based on mailing list feedback. This needs to be produced sometime before the meeting, so we can be sure people are making decisions based on the correct information. I hope the underlying concerns can be addressed well before next year's meeting.
The failure of the motion yesterday gives Luv time for a proper review of the issues. I didn't get a proxy vote i this time (me and paper based - or electronic emulations thereof) systems don't get along well, but I would have voted against the motion, mainly to (1) give more time to consider it fully, and (2) to explore the range of alternatives other than the two presented (i.e. disincorporation or keep going as we have been).
I'm not strongly in favour or against the motion, but would like to see the issues and alternatives explored more fully. Maybe by the next AGM, there will have been enough discussion and arguments presented to make a clearer, better informed decision. -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com