[Linux-aus] Representation: remote vote, face2face meetings
jdub at perkypants.org
Tue Feb 4 15:59:37 UTC 2003
<quote who="Anthony Towns">
> The question is whether Linux Australia will be more effective at "doing
> stuff" if it's focussed in Sydney, or if its committee is spread around.
You don't need a committee member in every state to "do stuff" in every
state (if that's an important function of LA at all). There are LUGs and
volunteers all around the country, in every region - they only need the
permission of the LA ctte to say "we are acting on behalf of Linux
At a basic level, LA is going to be arse at state/city level stuff anyway.
That's not its role. That's LUG turf, and they already kick arse at it. LA
is not around to take over the LUGs. See the LA webpage - it says so! :-)
We ought to let LA do what it can do best - represent its membership,
wherever they are from, and whoever they are - users, vendors, LUGs,
consultants, etc. The states/regions really don't factor into this...
(Again, I *do* think it is important to have some form of representation,
thus my suggestions about an advisory board style solution -> they can
tackle this issue better, as the are specifically tasked to do so. The ctte
'unf' is walking into a door.
'untz' is walking into a drum kit.
More information about the linux-aus