[Linux-aus] Re: [LACTTE] Constitution Version 6 - Last one!

Bret Busby bret at busby.net
Wed Jan 7 17:10:02 UTC 2004

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Jeff Waugh wrote:

> <quote who="Bret Busby">
> > We will have a ruling elite - an upper class in the Australian Linux
> > community, with these HLM's - perks for mates of the committee. - No
> > question about it.
> If you assume the worst, you'll encourage it along. I can't see any of these
> things happening without community involvement - that is what LA is all
> about. If the ctte did something terribly stupid or bad, the community would
> cause a ruckus.

But, things do go wrong - like the spamming via Linux Australia, as the 
mailing list does not require (or has not required) posters of messages, 
to be subscribers to the list.

And, when people have complained, the answer has been simple - "get 
stuffed - this is the way we do it - like it or lump it!"

> > Why can't the SGM and the AGM, all be conducted, via the Internet? Why 
> > can't the elections, be performed, via the Internet?
> Because the current constitution does not allow for it. It has been said
> numerous times now that online voting and so on are goals the committee
> would like to achieve.

And, it has taken over a year, to get to "hey, maybe it is not a bad 
idea - let's think about it"? Well, I suppose, that is the purpose of 

It is a few years now, since I was involved in an organisation 
(associated with ICANN or IANA, whichever replaced the other), which 
conducted meetings and polls, including elections, over the Internet. It 
is not as if it is new technology - it is old technology, like petrol 
motors. But, still, Linux Australia, like those who believed that horses 
pulling carts were the only way to go, and horseless carriages are evil, 
dangerous things, is still unable to come to terms with things like 
Internet conferences and meetings, and polls and elections via the 

> > And, what happens, for example, if a WA member has an issue about the 
> > operation of the organisation? Does the WA member just have to accept 
> > that there is no control over the organisation, except in NSW, and, 
> > therefore, only those in NSW, have any control over the organisation, 
> > making the organisation, in fact, a NSW organisation?
> If they're a member, they're a member, no matter which state or country
> they're in.

Yes, that may be, but, it is like an overseas organisation in which I 
was a member - if you were there, you had a say, and knew what was going 
on, and, had recourse if things went awry, but, in not being where the 
organisation was located, a member was just a passive member, with no 
real say, and, no recourse when things go wrong.

What recourse does a WA member have, if the rules are broken? Fly over 
to NSW and complain to the courts or regulatory body, in NSW? We are 
not all millionaires.

Bret Busby
West Australia

"So once you do know what the question actually is,
 you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
  Chapter 28 of 
  "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
  A Trilogy In Four Parts",
  written by Douglas Adams, 
  published by Pan Books, 1992 

More information about the linux-aus mailing list