<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-AU link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Larger committees can work so long as they can meet quorum; they can become difficult if decisions are made by consensus but the committee meetings are technically ruled under laws (common or otherwise) which indicate that the majority will rule. I once sat on a large committee and my fellow committee member and I would count up the likely votes. If we thought that there was a majority either she or I would move “the motion be put.:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Extending ANY of the roles to a multi-year commitment might equally discourage someone to nominate. Now, instead of just one year they have to commit two years of their life? If you really just joined as a general committee member are you now expected to go for one of the non-general positions?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>It's not quite as easy as it looks.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Linux Australia doesn’t need more council members or more subcommittees. It needs people to be doing stuff that promotes its goals and aims...and I think that’s the main problem.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>DSL<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> linux-aus [mailto:linux-aus-bounces@lists.linux.org.au] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Nathan Bailey<br><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, 11 December 2016 8:36 PM<br><b>To:</b> paulway@mabula.net<br><b>Cc:</b> Linux Australia <linux-aus@lists.linux.org.au><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Linux-aus] Proposal: two year overlapping terms, more council members<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Hi Paul,<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal> I like the gist of your idea, but I suspect the practicality is difficult, in that:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>a) Larger committees can find it harder to come to consensus (and longer to build momentum)<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>b) Larger committees will also be more expensive to coordinate in-person meetings for<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>But we could see some roles be for two years (eg. president) or having some overlap (eg. three months at end of term for key roles such as president and treasurer).<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>-N<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 12 December 2016 at 04:12, Paul Wayper <<a href="mailto:paulway@mabula.net" target="_blank">paulway@mabula.net</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm'><p class=MsoNormal>Hi all,<br><br>What I observe from Hugh and Kathy's statements about what Linux Australia has<br>achieved in the last year, and the ensuing discussion, is that LA council<br>positions require a fair bit of work, and it's very difficult to find people<br>that have simple enough lives that they can dedicate that much time to doing<br>the work without real life intruding.<br><br>This is no surprise - everyone's busy these days :-) And while we all want to<br>see Linux Australia continue to be a forum for FOSS advocacy, an umbrella<br>group for several successful FOSS conferences, and a variety of other things,<br>we also don't expect the people that volunteer to be its elected council to<br>pause the rest of their lives while serving.<br><br>So I'd like to put forward the proposal that each position have effectively<br>two people on it; one being the role leader, the other being an understudy.<br>The understudy is there to learn the job and to step in should the role leader<br>be required for whatever reason to step down or take a break.<br><br>::::<br><br>Option A: each election elects the understudy for the position. The terms for<br>each position are therefore twice as long, with each understudy stepping up to<br>be the next role leader at the next election.<br><br>Option B: each election elects both role leader and understudy, with terms<br>operating as normal.<br><br>Option C: each general member be also delegated (in some way) to be the<br>understudy for a particular role, expanding the number of general council<br>members if necessary.<br><br>Option D: expand the number of general council members to add an understudy<br>for each role plus all the current council members. The understudies do not<br>hold an official position in the same way that the role leader.<br><br>I'm sure the creative minds on the Linux Australia list can find a couple more<br>variants. I suspect that we currently unofficially run with option C above.<br><br>::::<br><br>The main disadvantage of this proposal is that it (generally) requires more<br>council members. In some cases it also requires more people to put themselves<br>forward for the council and to be voted on. This may involve extra expense<br>for LA (?), the need to find more people to actually put themselves forward,<br>and the extra complications of planning and organising that having a larger<br>council would involve.<br><br>The main advantage I hope for this proposal is that the business of Linux<br>Australia can continue to progress if one or more elected officials need to<br>step down. This seems to have happened a number of times, and as Hugh has<br>said this sees LA move into more of a holding pattern and stall on achieving<br>its goals.<br><br>Let the discussion begin!<br><br>Have fun,<br><br>Paul<br>_______________________________________________<br>linux-aus mailing list<br><a href="mailto:linux-aus@lists.linux.org.au">linux-aus@lists.linux.org.au</a><br><a href="http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus" target="_blank">http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>