Re: [luv-announce] Notice of resumption of adjourned Special General Meeting, Tuesday 6 Dec 2016
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 02:32:23PM +1100, Andrew Pam wrote:
SGM BUSINESS
The only matter of business to be considered at this meeting is:
*That Linux Users of Victoria apply to become a subcommittee of Linux Australia and conditional upon acceptance, wind up the present Victorian association as per rule 76 and section 133 of the Act and transfer all members and assets to the newly formed subcommittee of Linux Australia.*
Are there any details (or at least a reasonable summary) of this proposal available anywhere? and a rationale for why it has been proposed? what are the arguments for and against? At the moment, I have no strong opinion one way or the other (but with a slight leaning towards "why? what's the point?"), but would like to know if there's any reason why I should have such an opinion. if the LUV lists and meetings continue as before and there's no risk of losing autonomy, just easing of the administrative overhead then I can't see any reason to object. craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
On Tuesday, 29 November 2016 1:47:47 PM AEDT Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
*That Linux Users of Victoria apply to become a subcommittee of Linux Australia and conditional upon acceptance, wind up the present Victorian association as per rule 76 and section 133 of the Act and transfer all members and assets to the newly formed subcommittee of Linux Australia.*
Are there any details (or at least a reasonable summary) of this proposal available anywhere? and a rationale for why it has been proposed?
what are the arguments for and against?
IMHO there is no good argument against. The first argument for is that it saves us money on insurance for public events. While we are covered for the main meetings and we have got special case coverage for some other meetings from LA in the past it is easier to just be officially part of LA and have it all sorted out. We have ongoing issues in getting people to volunteer for committee positions. Reducing the amount of committee work by avoiding all statutory requirements of being a formally registered society is a benefit. I would like to have the committee concentrate on the core business of LUV which is arranging events to educate people about Linux and related computer science/engineering and promoting Linux. Complying with government regulations for paperwork takes time and energy we just don't have to spare. We are currently losing money consistently albeit slowly. For some time donations have not been keeping up with expenses. The difference between donations and expenses is small enough that LA are prepared to cover the difference. This isn't going to be an immediate problem for some years but again I'd like to remove that as an issue for the committee to be concerned about. As an aside avoiding some expenses with paperwork will help in reducing the financial shortfall every year.
if the LUV lists and meetings continue as before and there's no risk of losing autonomy, just easing of the administrative overhead then I can't see any reason to object.
We will have a committee elected by LUV members to arrange meetings etc. The meetings will be in the same locations (unless we get a better offer). The same topics will be discussed at meetings, and hopefully we will have more energy to spend on finding good speakers. The same server will be used for hosting the LUV mailing lists, web site, and other resources. There won't be a change that will be apparent to most users. I'm hoping for a statistical increase in the number of speakers we find, but that won't be immediately obvious. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
On 2016-11-30 15:26, Russell Coker via luv-main wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 November 2016 1:47:47 PM AEDT Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote: *That Linux Users of Victoria apply to become a subcommittee of Linux Australia and conditional upon acceptance, wind up the present Victorian association as per rule 76 and section 133 of the Act and transfer all members and assets to the newly formed subcommittee of Linux Australia.* Are there any details (or at least a reasonable summary) of this proposal available anywhere? and a rationale for why it has been proposed?
what are the arguments for and against?
IMHO there is no good argument against. As far as I am concerned, becoming a subcommittee is a non-issue. We should have done it already. Years ago. A bigger issue I see concerning LUV is that the November Special General Meeting was adjourned due to lack of quorum. I couldn't go myself because I was sick. It seems to me in recent years that people are losing interest in LUV - for various reasons. Can anything be done to rectify this? I know that one of the arguments (that I didn't believe) previously mentioned against becoming a subcommittee was along the lines of "the LA committee of the future may not be interested in doing what is best for LUV" and that "we may lose the culture of LUV that makes it attractive" - but in actual fact that it seems to me that this is already happening right now. When people don't show up to important meetings to have their say. When it is hard to get nominated committee members (let alone electing committee members). It has been been months(?) since this subcommittee has been proposed again, yet the first serious discussion I see was from yesterday. Does this mean everyone now agrees with it and there is no need to discuss it? Or maybe people have lost interest?
On 30/11/16 16:03, Brian May via luv-main wrote:
A bigger issue I see concerning LUV is that the November Special General Meeting was adjourned due to lack of quorum. I couldn't go myself because I was sick.
That's standard practice for all LUV AGMs and SGMs. We never have quorum, because quorum is defined in our constitution as 10% of the membership. Our membership is defined by the luv-announce mailing list and is currently 1463 members, so quorum would be 146 attendees. We've never had that many people attend a meeting, so we always adjourn votes and pass them at the adjourned meeting under the relaxed quorum rules for adjourned meetings.
It has been been months(?) since this subcommittee has been proposed again, yet the first serious discussion I see was from yesterday. Does this mean everyone now agrees with it and there is no need to discuss it? Or maybe people have lost interest?
Well, it has been discussed a number of times already over the last few years including on the lists and in person at both main and beginners meetings, so I imagine many members have already expressed their views. But of course we're always happy to hear more feedback! Cheers, Andrew
On Wednesday, 30 November 2016 4:03:16 PM AEDT Brian May via luv-main wrote:
A bigger issue I see concerning LUV is that the November Special General Meeting was adjourned due to lack of quorum. I couldn't go myself because I was sick.
It seems to me in recent years that people are losing interest in LUV - for various reasons. Can anything be done to rectify this?
I know that one of the arguments (that I didn't believe) previously mentioned against becoming a subcommittee was along the lines of "the LA committee of the future may not be interested in doing what is best for LUV" and that "we may lose the culture of LUV that makes it attractive" - but in actual fact that it seems to me that this is already happening right now. When people don't show up to important meetings to have their say. When it is hard to get nominated committee members (let alone electing committee members).
I agree that we have problems in attendance. The beginners' SIG is getting some interest and new people who don't attend the main meetings. If smaller less formal meetings is what interests people then there's nothing stopping us from arranging another. I recall that someone ran a cafe Linux meetup associated with LUV, we could do that again. Some people say that with more Youtube videos about Linux than they have time to watch there isn't a great incentive to attend LUV meetings. It's possible for us to change the focus of the club if there are enough members who have that opinion. I think that one significant benefit in merging with LA is that we could concentrate on these things without distraction. Also we could hopefully get more committee members who aren't concerned with issues of paperwork and just want to help run fun meetings to teach people about Linux. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
Hi all. On 30/11/2016 4:03 PM, Brian May via luv-main wrote:
It seems to me in recent years that people are losing interest in LUV - for various reasons. Can anything be done to rectify this?
In my case, it's not lack of interest, but a combination of $JOB workload, and the fact that my hearing has deteriorated fairly badly over the years. As such, attending the meetings becomes a bit like it being run by the Martians from "Mars Attacks" (Or the teachers from the old Charlie Brown cartoons) as I can make out that something is being said, but fail to make out 80% of the content. Put me in a room with multiple people talking and all I take away is a headache and tinnitus. That's the main reason I don't tend to get to meetings these days. (Asthma and trying to breath well anywhere near the CBD doesn't help either.) I do however follow the LUV mailing lists with great interest. Regards, Morrie.
On Thursday, 1 December 2016 6:24:26 PM AEDT Morrie Wyatt via luv-main wrote:
On 30/11/2016 4:03 PM, Brian May via luv-main wrote:
It seems to me in recent years that people are losing interest in LUV - for various reasons. Can anything be done to rectify this?
In my case, it's not lack of interest, but a combination of $JOB workload, and the fact that my hearing has deteriorated fairly badly over the years. [...] I do however follow the LUV mailing lists with great interest.
I'm glad you enjoy the lists. Do you have any suggestions for how we can improve services to users who don't attend meetings? You may be aware of the hands-on training sessions we have run at beginners' SIG meetings. It would be possible to run some of those over the Internet with IRC or other IM for communication. Would that be of interest to you? The general concept would be to have a number of people (at least 4 to make it an effective use of the trainer's time) login to VMs and get practical experience at various sysadmin and coding tasks following a set lesson plan. When they have problems they contact the trainer by IM who can then login to the VM and offer advice on how to proceed. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 03:26:45PM +1100, russell@coker.com.au wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 November 2016 1:47:47 PM AEDT Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
*That Linux Users of Victoria apply to become a subcommittee of Linux Australia [...]
what are the arguments for and against?
IMHO there is no good argument against.
ok, sounds reasonable. gpg-signed proxy sent to luv-secretary (i can't make it myself, i have a hospital appt on the 6th). craig -- craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
participants (5)
-
Andrew Pam -
Brian May -
Craig Sanders -
Morrie Wyatt -
Russell Coker