[Linux-aus] Nominations and their spiels for the LA election

[Stewart Smith]

On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 11:52 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <quote who="Christopher Yeoh">
> 
> > If there are problems with not having sufficently geographic diverse
> > representation on the committee, then what about changing things in the
> > future to allow LUGs (say with minimum size and regular meeting
> > qualifications) to be have the right to internally vote for a
> > representative on the LA committee (eg additional reserved spots - maybe
> > only for those areas/LUGs where there aren't existing reps)?
> 
> There was an attempt a while back to create a forum for LUG leaders to work
> together and interact with the LA committee. It was in the form of a mailing
> list at that time, but could be something else. I would far prefer something
> like that to swelling the committee with geographical representatives. Do we
> need geographical *representation* to pursue LA's goals (ie. the community's
> goals) or do we need better *communication*? I'd suggest the latter.

As Jeff says, there was an attempt - and it didn't really work out...

I also think that geographical representation on ctte would be flawed at
best.

Perhaps a LUG Advisory Board (LAB) that chats with LA ctte at various
points (maybe every 2 or 3 months) to discuss various things?

I think the regular dial-ins from LUG people to the LA ctte conf call
have been great, but perhaps doing it all en-masse will get larger
participation and cross group communication going.

thougths?
-- 
Stewart Smith (stewart at linux.org.au)
Committee Member, Linux Australia

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20070110/ae48ab7c/attachment-0001.pgp