[Computerbank] mistake about nominations at AGM

[Julien Goodwin]

On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 01:58:42PM +1030, David Lloyd arranged a set of bits into the following:
> 
> Julien,
> 
> > > Computerbank Australia Inc
> > 
> > WRT Insurance, I've been seeing Con (CAI Tresurer) putting several full
> > days of work getting the runaround from Insurance companies trying to
> > get this sorted out to SA's satisfation.
> 
> Don't try to blame this on "those South Australians". Talk to the
> Australian Government who doesn't provide Public Liability Insurance for
> the WFTD programs they force WFTD participants to work for.
> 
> Insurance companies are the worst offenders for giving people the run
> around. It's generally why it's mostly better to work through a broker
> (who then gets to deal with being run around).
> 
> It's also another reason why you start the renewal process at least a
> month before the renewal date AND most insurance companies, in order to
> keep you with them, will tell you that your insurance is about to run out.
I'm not blaming this on SA, the fact that they pointed out something
where we had problems should be comended.

> 
> > >  3. Doesn't seem to understand its constitution
> > >     - which incidentally is written in legalese
> > >     - this isn't Computerbank's fault; they look like the model rules
> > >       under the Victorian or NSW act which are just *stupidly* written
> > >       in my opinion
> > There are issues with the constitution (In fact I believe that the
> > version people are using is a copy of a copy that passed though my
> > laptop late last year... [I only did file format conversion]). But if
> > people don't tell us what's wrong then we can only fix what we see.
> 
> In a healthy organisation I shouldn't have to look at the constitution;
> those running the organisation should simply follow it.It should
> just be there and the organisation runs. I have just sorted out two
> constitutions, one written from scratch via the SA model rules and
> reviewed another one.
> 
> Most new organisations don't have a person like me around or the funds or
> means to hire a lawyer/paralegal person to do this so they end up copying
> the model rules. This isn't always a bad thing (but I don't like the NSW
> model rules).
> 
> Worse they can just copy another organisation's rules and add bits and
> pieces willy nilly. *hmm*
> 
> I could make comments on the CAI's constitution but I just don't have the
> time and I think CAI is sinking as a national body ;-P Remember, the
> Titanic did sink, but it took a very, very long time.
> 
> > >  4. Last time I looked I thought the fees were $12
> > >     - now they're $3.30
> > >     - can someone explain this?
> > $1 +GST per month, paying through to April (IIRC), so the fee depends on
> > when you become a member.
> 
> That's just stupidly confusing. Really. It is. In fact, I'm not even sure
> that's *right*. The fees should be:
> 
>  1.1D(10.91 / 365.25) according to my understanding.
> 
> ...where D is number of days until the next time you must pay fees.
It's switching over to a set fee per year (whether there is 1 day or 360
to go) as soon as the new committee can do it.

> ;-P
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/computerbank/attachments/20031125/acab2e6e/attachment.pgp