On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 21:01, Bret Busby wrote: > > Sorry, but a lot of people disagreed with you. Being able to voice a concern > > does not necessarily mean that you will get your way. And welcome to democracy! We encourage people having a say. This is why we wanted to put all changes to constitution etc forward at a GM at the conf - where the overwhelming majority of our members would be able to be there IN PERSON, participate, feel and *BE* involved. > Ah, people may have disagreed with me, but, I was not the only one who > objected to the list being open to all, with non-subscribers being > allowed to post, or, who was getting fed up with a spam to message ratio > of about 3:1. The arguments have been put forward before - and you're not contributing anything new - shut up. > > > 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 > > > committees... > It is not a matter of "conspired efforts to annoy" me; it is more > disappointment that what would have been useful, apears to have gone > through the "committee routine" - if you want an idea stopped, send it > to a committee". So you'd prefer some kind of secret SGM held in a small back street of melbourne in the middle of the year with me and a couple of people picked up off the street to change the constitution? Stop contradicting yourself - get something to say that's constructive and helpful or don't say anything at all. > A year is a long time, for a simple change, to have waited before being "simple change" - you just proved you have no idea what you're talking about. Go change the Australian constitution on a whim - go on. > even considered by the committee. It could have been implemented, > somehow, via postal polling, surely, if no other way. Dispensation could > probably have been obtained, from the NSW Commissioner of Fair Trading, > or whatever is responsible. "Hi Mr (or Mrs) Legal Man/Woman - we'd like to ignore our constitution - PLEASE" - we can't just send all members to Cuba for a vote. > If such polling to change the constitution, to allow for the > practicality of Internet voting and meetings, could not have been so > brought about, it should have been able to be brought about without > requiring the holding of the Linux conference, otherwise, once again, it > goes to the issue of the separation of Linux Australia, from the > conference and its attendees, and, whether Linux Australia is really > just for the conference attendees. How come when you put the phone to your ear all I could hear was the sea? Proxy votes, online discussion, online membership. WHat do you want - fly everybody to Alice (pretty central to .au) and have a meeting there? great use of funds - we'll help the .au linux community by having pointless debate. > > > 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. Vote them out you idiot. > And then, localities will prevail, and, those not resident in the state > of incorporation, will lose, if registration is not federal. I'm not a lawyer - i don't know all the details - if there's a good reason to seek legal advice about where/how we're registered - PUT THE ARGUMENT FORWARD. and QUOTE from legal sources. > Federal registration would be simpler, and, easier to manage, if it is > implemented properly. it is that simple. this isn't an argument - it's heresay Yes - by arguing that committees don't do anything you hit a real sore point - i've been up late, working long hours to make sure people's membership is processed promptly and you've done the exact opposite of a "rock on" mail. piss off and find something useful to say. THread over. P.S. (to others) - despite what this mail sounds like I'm actually a pretty nice guy and quite balanced - check the archives. Plus, I needed to balance Jeff's rational calm voice. -- Stewart Smith <stewart@linux.org.au> Linux Australia Inc
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part