[Linux-aus] Divesting Linux Australia of non-Linux tasks

[Russell Coker]

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012, Jamezpolley <jamezpolley at gmail.com> wrote:
> > My suggestion is to have a SPI like organisation to manage insurance,
> > money,  etc and then having Linux Australia as a sub-committee on an
> > equal status to PyCon et al.  Linux Australia would keep the same DNS
> > name, use the same servers, run the same web sites, and keep promoting
> > Linux.  This means that people who are only interested in Linux wouldn't
> > miss out in any way.  In fact having people who aren't so focussed on
> > Linux but who have relevant skills managing all the administrative tasks
> > that aren't directly related to Linux advocacy could be a good thing.
> 
> There's no reason for this to wait for a name change (that might not even
> happen) before we set this up. This is a good idea, and it would work just
> fine right now.
> 
> All it would take is a few people stepping up and asking the Council to
> create a new sub-committee. They'd need to have a charter so that the
> council and the community are clear on the responsibilities of the
> subcommittee - but that only needs to be a few sentences (look at
> http://linux.org.au/sub-committees to see what the existing sub-committees
> have).
> 
> It would also be good to have some evidence of some community support for
> the makeup of the subcomittee. The two LUGs had members elected by local
> communities - for this particular subcommittee, an election on MemberDB
> probably might make sense, but discussion on the lists might work too

It's becoming increasingly obvious that the current discussion when framed as 
"rename LA" isn't going anywhere.

Your suggestion seems like a good one.  I think we should consider what parts 
of LA operations can be usefully split into sub-committees and then later 
split off into separate organisations if the separation is found to work well.

One task is general advocacy of liberty in relation to technology (EG opposing 
censorship and software patents).  Another is managing the financial issues 
related to conferences (insurance etc).  Both of these tasks require skills 
with differ from those required to advocate for Linux and therefore people who 
have the skill and interest required for one task won't necessarily have the 
skill or interest required for another.

In terms of the discussion of the benefits that SLUG gained from being a LA 
sub-committee, I would be more likely to volunteer for the LUV committee if 
LUV became a LA sub-committee.  I don't want to get involved with financial 
issues and government requirements for being a registered association but I am 
prepared to help arrange fun and educational meetings about Linux.

-- 
My Main Blog         http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog    http://doc.coker.com.au/