[Linux-aus] Eliminating fees from the constitution?

Silvia Pfeiffer silvia at silvia-pfeiffer.de
Tue May 3 09:15:01 EST 2011

I'd say we should avoid having to make further changes to the
constitution in the future as much as possible because it's a painful
process and IIUC it also costs us something to register it with the
Dept of Fair Trading. So, I'd prefer if the option for membership fees
remains in the constitution in the way it currently is. Remember that
the constitution is there to give the organization a framework to work
within. How it actually works should be worked out within the
decisions taken between council and the community and it doesn't make
sense to limit that where it's not necessary.


On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Mary Gardiner <mary at puzzling.org> wrote:
> Short version: I'd like to know if there's significant support for eliminating
> the *possibility* of fees from the LA constitution (that is, make it so that a
> future LA would need to change the constitution to introduce fees again). This
> is somewhere where data would be useful for our final proposal.
> Since having everyone express their opinion would be extremely noisy for the
> list, I'd appreciate that people with an opinion fill out
> https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dFk4X1NHRkwzbWdPaDd5OER6VjhaX1E6MQ
> or, if that is for any reason impossible or undesirable for you, please email
> me off-list with your answers (such answers may be shared with Council).
> Aggregate results will be shared here probably in about a week.
> On Mon, May 02, 2011, David Newall wrote:
>> I'm suspicious of constitutional changes, however if a change is
>> necessary then a change there must be.  The trouble is, there doesn't
>> seem to be any actual need for this change.  Mary's comment, quoted
>> above, implies that nothing changes, in which case let's change nothing.
> OK! I'm not that wedded to the one month change and could leave it at three
> months.
> If by "this change" you mean the whole diff to Sections 3 and 8 though, there
> are reasons for other changes that I think stand, in terms of having the
> capacity to get members to renew their membership actively rather than
> passively.
>> I want to know--as asked in prior messages--what need there is to charge
>> a fee.
> You seem to be taking a couple of positions in this thread:
>  (1) LA must not change the constitution more than necessary: in which case,
>     the constitution will continue to allow a fee, because it currently does
>     (2005) and the new model does (2010).
>  (2) LA should change the constitution more radically to either make the fee
>     extremely optional (99 years) or eliminate it.
> I'd genuinely like to know which you prefer.
> -Mary
> _______________________________________________
> linux-aus mailing list
> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
> http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus

More information about the linux-aus mailing list