[Linux-aus] LA Name Change - the process

[Gary Allpike]

Hi, 

I wonder if anyone can satisfy my curiosity.... 

Are there
any actual documented occasions where the name of the organisation has
caused problems that have proven so substantial as to be insurmountable
(without requiring excessive effort on behalf of the
committee/conference organiser/whatever) thus having a negative impact
on the running of the organisation or events associated with it? 

What
quantifiable benefit will changing the name provide to the organisation?


What quantifiable cost will there be to the organisation to change the
name? 

I'd like to remind people that the assets of the organisation,
both tangible and intangible have come about as a result of the
organisation being "Linux Australia". 

LA runs the best Linux
Conference in the world (I may be slightly biased) and has the funds to
underwrite and back this conference. While linux.conf.au is not the
primary focus of LA it certainly is it's main source of funds and it's
primary publicly visible activity. I would hate to see a blurring of the
focus of the organisation lead in any way to having a detrimental effect
on the running of linux.conf.au. Will there be checks and measure put in
place to ensure that the new expanded activities of the organisation (I
am led to believe that this will be the case after all the obstacles to
this are removed by changing the name) to ensure the continued support
of linux.conf.au? (Hypothetically; "Linux Advocacy and associated
activities is now just one of our many objectives, we have some other
new thing we want to work on so we have decided not to fund LCA any more
and use our money elsewhere") 

Please understand, I am not trying to be
a smart ass just for the sake of it here. I just cant grasp WHY we need
to change the name, nor shake the feeling that somehow in all of this
Linux Australia could in some way become diluted. 

Cheers, 

Gary 

On
15/07/2012 7:53, James Purser wrote: 

> Okay because everyone seems to
be getting hopped up on goof balls over this lets clarify: 
> The
process is this: 
> 1. Council to submit a number of options for vote.
This includes NOT CHANGING THE NAME
> 2. Vote is held. If result is NOT
CHANGING THE NAME, that's the end of the process 
> 3. If result is
anything else, top three names are taken to a second vote. 
> 4. Winner
is given one year recording contract with... oh hold on. 
> That's it.

> Understandably there are passionate feelings on both sides. Can we
please put our arguments forward in a thoughtful, respectful manner? It
is possible to argue your case without going personal. -- 
> James
Purser

-- 
Best regards,

Gary Allpike
gary at allpikes.com.au
Mob: 0429
342 412 (Intl: +61-429 342 412)
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20120715/c495888f/attachment.htm