[Computerbank] AGM Fiasco Redux

[David Lloyd]

Dan,

> But for the most part all this is beside the point. It's fiddling
> semantics, Everyone involved at the moment sounds like a bunch of
> politcians as opposed to people who are trying to do some good and help
> people. 

A bunch of politicians? I am saying a number of things, one of which
happens to be that I think the calling of the AGM has been sufficiently
unclear as to be invalid.

> In case you have all forgotten we are a volunteer organisation and as
> such are reliant upon good will, the good will of the donors and the
> good will of the volunteers but sometimes even moreso the good will of
> the organisers. Instead of petty bickering and semantics, Build a bridge
> and get over it. 

Precisely, in South Australia we are building a bridge. It's called
"Incorporate on our own and fix things by ourselves". This is primarily
because it appears to be the best way to work for ourselves.

> machines to SA. And that's great it's exactly what we need to do. So why
> does the goodwill seems to stop as soon as it comes to meetings and
> management, as soon as a position is mentioned or something even vaguely
> related to anything that might be mentioned in the cons. all the good
> will seems to evaporate right before your eyes and it's all about what I
> can get for me. At least that's how it appears

Appearances are often deceiving.

> The BIGGEST problem CAI has had in all the time I've known about it is
> lack of good will, Whether it's personal fueds or quibbling over the
> semantics of what is a fucking pitiful constitution.

There is another organisation I happen to be involved with who suddenly
found itself in a total and utter mess because they failed to call an AGM
properly. I could hardly say that those pointing out the invalidities in
various matters constitutional are the ones with ill will - they're more
likely the ones with good will.

/me sigh

> Those invovled have managed to nullify the entire organisation and
> bring it to the verge of tearing itself apart.

That's been on the cards for a very long time. If the AGM is not called
correctly, then the AGM is invalid along with all the decisions made at
that AGM unless you can convince a number of lawyers to back the
organisation up afterwards.

Now, how is pointing this out a bad thing?

> So let, no in fact encourage/demand/make/beg the state bodies to
> incorporate, then they can deal with the day to day running of
> Computerbank operations, the getting the computers out to the people who
> need them, the running of the WFD projects, the handling of recruiting
> and training of members, the funding of their own operations. 

Is it just me or have I been saying that myself?

> Let CAI become an advisory body, a peer group. A group to facilitate
> co-operation between the states, exchange of excess machines and
> hardware and misdirected applications/donations, to foster new
> computerbanks in areas they don't already exist and to form liasons with
> groups on a national level(Federal Govt., Linux Australia, Sun, IBM
> etc..) and to negotiate National corporate sponsorships and donations.

Better still, let Computerbank Australia Inc become Computerbank Victoria
Incorporated. And then implement the national body as the time is
appropriate.

> Get WA involved, and not just in a token way they are a part of
> Australia too last time I looked. 

There are reasons they're not involved overtly with the national
organisation. They do share documents and such. Kylie has information
about that.

> provide by IBM I think it is.. I'm sure we can find someone to help out
> in that regard for meetings. Cause IRC meetings suck and are
> exclusionary. 

Agreed.

> Once a year conference (could possibly even be held at/during LCA, just
> a suggestion) rotating around the various cities at a set time of year
> to get together and spend a few days discussing things a la teh National
> Premiers conference.

Conferences are difficult to organise. Let it follow LCA via the
mini-confs.

> You guys may or may not think you are Computerbank but you're not, the
> people who give up their weeknights and weekends to come in and help out
> are. They deserve a say. Whether or not they use that opportunity is up
> to them. Having a national organisation with what? 15? members is
> pitiful.

I shouldn't dole out more sarcasm, but I wonder why there are a small
number of members.

> It's time to do soemthing similar to the amazingly selfless act
> the previous LA ctte did when they automatically made all the attendees
> members of LA to revitalise the organisation.

Linux Australia was not able to that in accordance with its constitution.
Be very careful and make sure you can do this if you do.

> Onto the current AGM which FWIW is actually in volitation of the
> consitution before it's even begun :-) (read section 9.1)
> 
> Personally I think it's a moot point and the important meeting is the
> one to be scheduled for July next year when the changes come into
> effect. But assuming that those changes are all supposition on my behalf
> at the moment I say the there are only two requirements that need to
> come out of this AGM.

No, it is NOT a moot point. It's not about good, bad or indifferent will.
If the AGM is not held with proper form it's not an AGM. You might not
respect the Victorian Associations Incorporations Act 1981 or Computerbank
Australia Inc's constitution but simply because you think that we can just
ignore it (because we have goodwill) doesn't make either of them go away.

> 1. The new ctte devotes it's major focus to changing the structure of
> CAI and a cons. rewrite.

Possibly. I think it would be better for Computerbank Australia Inc to
change name to Computerbank Victoria Inc [which as time goes by, it more
and more is].

> 2. Isn't made up of entirely one state with token members from elsewhere
> *smiles politely at the victorians*  

Politely?

> If this means we need time for the various states to sign up members
> then lets agree on a suitable timeframe and postpone the meeting. If,
> despite the evidence against the meeting being in line with the
> consitution anways which I'm willing to ignore, you want a process for
> doing that...

I'm not sure you can postpone the AGM much longer. For some reason,
someone decided to limit the AGM to 4 months after the end of the group's
financial year as opposed to 5 months which is allowable under The Act.

> 15. ADJOURNMENT
> 
> 15.1 The Chairman of a General Meeting at which a quorum is present may
> with the consent of the meeting adjourn the meeting from time to time
> and place to place, but no business shall be transacted at an adjourned
> meeting other than the business left unfinished at the meeting at which
> the adjournment took place.
> 
> 15.2 Where a meeting is adjourned for 14 days or more, a like notice of
> the adjourned meeting shall be given as in the case of the General
> Meeting.
> 
> 15.3 Except as provided in Rules 15.1 and 15.2, it shall not be
> necessary to give notice of an adjournment or of the business to be
> transacted at an adjourned meeting.
> 
> that should cover it.. so we have the meeting and Grant (or whomever is
> chairing) adjourns it to a date we've agreed to beforehand and then we
> hold the AGM on that date. 

Hmmm...that depends on the definition of "AGM must be held". It might
work.

> No matter how/when we have it I think I should be an interim group at
> best. There should a new AGM scheduled for July (August at the latest)
> next year. No excuses with regard to audits etc. Get it done. If you
> have a date you know it needs to be done by then it shouldn't be too
> hard even if you have to pay for it if you need an auditor let me know

Unless the books were indeed in such a mess that it would have been
pointless to employ an auditor in the first place. Hmmm.

> I'll find one. And whoever ends up serving on this ctte their ONE major
> focus for the 6 or so months is to rewrite the consitution to reflect
> the organisational and structural changes and changing nature of CAI and
> to prepare the states and various other groups to implement the changes.

Ok, we seem to be agreeing with each other in form but not necessarily in
process. This is probably Ok.

> So stop whinging and start writing pffatches people.

:%s/pffatches/patches/g

1. Delete all the above
2. As soon as possible rename Computerbank Australia Incorporated:
   * Computerbank Victoria Incorporated
3. Allow Computerbank Victoria Incorporated to fix its own constitution
4. Wait six months for all the organistions to settle down
5. Work out a federal structure if required

I have actually already said this.


DSL