<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 07/24/2012 01:30 PM, James Polley wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAA+GJgSoUgxQeuZA3ssv1w9ieBTkTn65Vwjv11T_cE-zn4RQ2g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Compare this
with the paperwork to create the Parent Organisation Not<br>
Called Linux Australia, then moving Linux Australia under
PONCLA,<br>
shuffling bank accounts around to be owned by relevant orgs,
creating<br>
new ones, making sure the audit trail is clear for LA getting
seed<br>
funding from PONCLA for <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://linux.conf.au" target="_blank">linux.conf.au</a>,
but handing back 4 or 5 times<br>
that funding to the parent org when it's all done, and this
argument<br>
doesn't really hold much weight.<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm not sure where this process came from. Why wouldn't we
just be updating the name on our existing account? </div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Are you proposing that under the new scheme that each "sub
committee" of PONCLA won't even have a bank account? Ouch. I feel
sorry for the PONCLA treasurer.<br>
<br>
My point is that you can't argue that creating a new entity and
absorbing other orgs already with their own bank accounts is less
paperwork than opening a new bank account for an ongoing event. I've
been there and done it for LA. Twice. It's not that hard, and not
that onerous.<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>