[Linux-aus] State representation on the board

[Christopher Yeoh]

At 2004/1/9 13:08+1100  Jeff Waugh writes:
> > position to see the difference...
> 
> Why would SLUG people be any different? As I've indicated, SLUG doesn't have
> any strong informational links with LA at all, particularly now that I've
> resigned. SLUG committee members are, however, on the lug@ list. They have
> as much and as little opportunity to get involved as everyone else.

Are you really saying that LA committee members don't go to any SLUG
meetings or socialise with Linux people in NSW? Its the regular informal
chats which can be so useful. Mailing lists can be great, but face to
face communication fills some gaps - why else would you have things
like Debian conferences?

Besides, if the prevailing view from Queensland LA members (and I
really don't know if its, but I'm happy to trust Anthony here) is that
the lack of a local committee member has caused problems, then I think
its a view we should consider seriously.

I'm not saying that we need to put a quota requirement in the
constitution, just something we should all think about when choosing
who to vote for.

Chris
-- 
cyeoh at samba.org