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

[Bret Busby <bret@busby.net>]

On Tue, 6 Jan 2004, Anand Kumria wrote:

> 
> Hi Pia,
> 
> On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 06:22:32PM +1100, Pia Smith wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > This is the final Proposal for Constitution changes unless anyone makes
> > any other necessary suggestions. 
> 
> Well you are probably aware that notice needs to have been by the
> secretary 21 days prior to an SGM (Section 26 part 2). Currently the
> SGM/AGM is marked down for the 15th Jan -- so notice needed to have been
> given by the 25th December.
> 
> That may mean that nominations that are currently listed may be invalid
> and will have to be taken from the floor. I suspect you could argue that
> the changes in draft 5 were given with enough notice ... but you'd need
> to check.
> 

Whilst not a person who can attend the conferences, and therefore is not 
able to take part in the proceedings, surely it would be more practical, 
for nominations to be able to be accepted up until the chairman of the 
AGM declares nominations closed, immediately before holding the polls 
if needed, for the positions, in the course of the AGM? That is, unless 
the elections are conducted via email, or otherwise electronically, 
allowing absentee votes for people who do not attend the conferences.


>

<snip>

> 
> Some other problems:
> 	- The Committee can award honourary lifetime memership but that
> 	only requires a majority (4). Surely something like that ought
> 	to require a unianimous decision?


What is the justification for this "honorary lifetime membership"? What 
are the criteria? Whys hould some be able to obtain it and not ebveryone 
be automatically eligible for the same benefits?

Does that not make Linux Australia, a class society, like the cast 
system in India, or the English class system?

> 
> 	- Change 7, says that membership ceases at the AGM. I'm worried
> 	  that there might be some strange interaction with that and the
> 	  '28 days to pay rule' (Rule 3, Part 3). Also I think the
> 	  second sentence of change 7 is unnecessary.
> 

Hence, once again, it appears that Linux Australia is only an 
association of attendees at the annual conference.

The whole issue of membership needs resolving, if Linux Australia is to 
be more than just an association of attendees at the annual conference.

>

<snip>

> 
> 	- Change 23; is unneccessary, Common/Company seals are no longer
> 	  required for companies or associations in NSW (they are
> 	  optional).
> 

Does this by context mean that Linux Australia is NSW, and not federal? 
Is that correct; that Linux Australia is not a federal body, but is a 
body only of NSW, and therefore only subject to law in NSW?


-- 
Bret Busby
Armadale
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 
....................................................