[Linux-aus] Would Someone Call an SGM to Change the Constitution to Reflect the "Real" Name?

[James Polley]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 3:02 PM, David Lloyd <lloy0076 at adam.com.au> wrote:

>
> Hmmm…
>
> On 25/04/2012, at 12:50 PM, James Polley wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:46 PM, David Lloyd <lloy0076 at adam.com.au>wrote:
>
>>
>> Call a special general meeting to change the organisation's name? You lot
>> seem to want it, quit talking the talk and just walk the walk...
>
>
> There's no point calling an SGM at this stage. When an SGM gets called,
> the exact motions to be voted on at the SGM need to be included in the
> notice of the SGM. At this point, there's not even a consensus on *if* the
> name should be changed, let alone *what* it should be changed to.
>
>
> I know that - the committee appears to think it should change and we're
> arguing about bike sheds. I thought we were vaguely concerned about open
> source software advocacy and support...
>

I have no idea what you're responding to here, let alone what your response
means. Could you elaborate?


> A Special Resolution will definitely be required. A special resolution
> requires a three-quarters majority of people voting to agree before it can
> pass. If we put the motion today, I'm fairly certain that it wouldn't get
> the support of a three-quarter majority - so calling an SGM at this point
> would be a waste of the organisation's time and money.
>
>
> You've basically said that you don't believe a name change would actually
> get sufficient votes. In which case this whole discussion is fruitless and
> pointless.
>

Yet again you present a straw man[1]. It would be a lot easier for me to
assume you're acting in good faith if you'd start responding to what has
actually been written, instead of your own misrepresentation what was
written

In this case, the thing that you ignored (or are pretending to not have
noticed) is my qualification that I believe this is the state of things
*today*. I did not say that we will *never* reach a consensus.

The point of this discussion is to reach a consensus; either a consensus on
a new name, or a consensus that no name change should happen.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20120426/335681b2/attachment.htm