[Linux-aus] Proposed Linux Australia Constitution Changes

James Turnbull james at lovedthanlost.net
Thu Jul 14 11:10:24 EST 2011

David Newall wrote:
> I'm highly suspicious about the proposal. I don't buy the need for it;
> and while I accept we do need to change (specify) the financial year, I
> resent the other functional changes. The committee recommends (I assume
> John announced on their behalf), for example, that affiliate members be
> no longer allowed. Why? Careless mistake or political agenda? Surely
> it's neither, but whatever the reason, we've not being given full or
> sufficient disclosure. Are there other changes hiding? (Short answer: Yes.)

Have you heard the one about John Ferlito, Linux Australia and the 
Kennedy Assassination?

> This proposal should be rejected on the general principles that: it's
> too broad; and it's insufficiently explained. Vote no.

The current constitution is a mess - we've had several years of invalid 
amendments and it doesn't meet the organisation's needs.  What is 
proposed is a simple reboot of the document to bring it up to date, 
address the financial year issue and put us on the right path.

I applaud the current committee for tackling this head-on and I support 
this approach as the simplest way forward with the least potential for 
mistakes and issues.


James Turnbull

Author of:
* Pro Puppet (http://tinyurl.com/ppuppet)
* Pro Linux System Administration (http://tinyurl.com/linuxadmin)
* Pro Nagios 2.0 (http://tinyurl.com/pronagios)
* Hardening Linux (http://tinyurl.com/hardeninglinux)

More information about the linux-aus mailing list