[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Linux-aus] Nominations and their spiels for the LA election

Anthony Towns wrote:

I've thought for a while (some would say harped on about, perhaps) that
having people you can talk to directly about LA stuff is much better
than only being able to follow what's going on online...

I agree to the extent that there are significant portions of our community that would welcome the opportunity to discuss Linux Australia and its activities in a group face-to-face mode. There will other groups who feel most comfortable in an online mode and they should continue to be serviced in at least the manner to which they are today.

So in the interests of pre-election debate, I'd like to suggest something
like this:

    - in the interests of promoting Australian free software projects and
      hackers internationally, the President and Vice-President of
      Linux Australia shall each take one overseas trip a year to a free
      software event, to promote LA and keep up to date with events

I'm going to ask the dumb question. What benefit does promotion of Linux Australia at international events bring Linux Australia, its membership or the Australian Linux/FOSS community? Could you expand a bit on the benefits you see and what process is required to translate attendance at an event into tangible benefit?

    - each committee member shall participate at an event other than LCA
      that's at least 100km from their hometown at least once during the year


To make this truly effective I think I'd ammend this to read:

"Each committee member shall speak at LUG-related event or meeting, other than LCA, that's at least 100 km from their hometown and has not already been visited by any other committee member at least once during the year".

I'm not sure what problem you think this solves, but I can see some benefit in ensuring that the committee are personally active in speaking on behalf of the Linux Australia organisation to the membership of a reasonable number of LUGs each year. With the size of the present executive committee it would result in at least 12 LUGs each year getting at least one speaking attendance from a Linux Australia executive committee member each year. Given the number of active LUGs in Australia this might be viewed as significant.

    - each LUG of 50 members or more shall be entitled to ask LA to invite
      an Australian free software hacker to give a presentation at one
      of their meetings once a year

I'd have thought that LUGs were already entitled to ask for such a thing. Do you mean that Linux Australia should take on an obligation to reasonably honour such requests? It seems to me that the existing Grants scheme might reasonably be extended to cover such requests already. If there is genuine benefit to be had, it's something we should be considering.

Why do they have to be software hackers? Can they not be other active and significant community members? For example, if a LUG in some area were interested in starting a ComputerBank chapter, could they not invite an existing ComputerBank representative to speak?

    - each LUG of 150 members or more shall be entitled to ask LA
      to invite an international free software hacker to give a
      presentation at one of their meetings once a year

I'd be interested to know how much value our membership actually feels is associated with this idea. If, for example, we only had enough money to do this, or to organise some annual convention of LUGs, but not both, which would be preferred?

I presume the reasonable way to do this would usually be to have the international speaker be one of the LCA speakers, and to have them stay on a day or two longer in Australia to speak at LUGs. Is this what you had in mind or were you thinking we'd actually fly someone in from abroad specifically to speak at a LUG somewhere for a meeting?

I personally favour the idea of having Linux Australia sponsor some sort of LUG representative get-together. A face-to-face get-together would be expensive, but a regular teleconference could be quite economical.

regards
Terry