From russell at coker.com.au Sat Oct 1 12:06:28 2022 From: russell at coker.com.au (Russell Coker) Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2022 12:06:28 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] RIP LCA (or should I say "Vale LCA"?) and thanks. In-Reply-To: <74a204a-531e-d42b-173c-973c4182724a@darkmere.gen.nz> References: <74a204a-531e-d42b-173c-973c4182724a@darkmere.gen.nz> Message-ID: <6266554.Isy0gbHreE@xev> On Friday, 30 September 2022 09:50:30 AEST Simon Lyall via linux-aus wrote: > Hope to see many of you in the future, possibly at the new conference. I have no plans to attend IRL conferences. I have had Covid19 and recently have felt short of breath. I'm not sure how much of this is due to age etc and how much is from the disease, but I definitely want to avoid getting it again. So anyone who wants to see me again can do so online. The announcement didn't make clear how much of the new conference will be available online. I'll watch it on YouTube afterwards if it's IRL only. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ From simon at darkmere.gen.nz Sat Oct 1 19:24:49 2022 From: simon at darkmere.gen.nz (Simon Lyall) Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2022 22:24:49 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [Linux-aus] RIP LCA (or should I say "Vale LCA"?) and thanks. In-Reply-To: References: <74a204a-531e-d42b-173c-973c4182724a@darkmere.gen.nz> Message-ID: I've come across the following document that offers a couple of additional explanations behind the thinking about EO. Thanks to Tim Serong for pointing out that the main EO site has separate content to the 2023 EO site. https://everythingopen.au/news/introducing-everything-open/ -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.simonlyall.com/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar From krisgesling at gmail.com Mon Oct 3 08:55:39 2022 From: krisgesling at gmail.com (Kris Gesling) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2022 07:25:39 +0930 Subject: [Linux-aus] RIP LCA (or should I say "Vale LCA"?) and thanks. In-Reply-To: References: <74a204a-531e-d42b-173c-973c4182724a@darkmere.gen.nz> Message-ID: Hi all, I imagine that I'm not alone in thinking this but wanted to make sure it got expressed. A big thanks to everyone that has already put lots of time and effort into this new conference, and to the many more that will volunteer their time to see it through. I'm really looking forward to Everything Open! Cheers Kris On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 at 18:55, Simon Lyall via linux-aus < linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > > I've come across the following document that offers a couple of > additional explanations behind the thinking about EO. Thanks to Tim > Serong for pointing out that the main EO site has separate content to the > 2023 EO site. > > https://everythingopen.au/news/introducing-everything-open/ > > -- > Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.simonlyall.com/ > "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ljk+la at ljk.id.au Mon Oct 3 09:30:44 2022 From: ljk+la at ljk.id.au (Les Kitchen) Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2022 06:30:44 +0800 Subject: [Linux-aus] RIP LCA (or should I say "Vale LCA"?) and thanks. In-Reply-To: References: <74a204a-531e-d42b-173c-973c4182724a@darkmere.gen.nz> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 3, 2022, at 05:55, Kris Gesling via linux-aus wrote: > I imagine that I'm not alone in thinking this but wanted to > make sure it got expressed. Yep, you are not alone. Thanks for expressing that for all of us. > A big thanks to everyone that has already put lots of time and > effort into this new conference, and to the many more that > will volunteer their time to see it through. I'm really > looking forward to Everything Open! Yeah. More generally, it's been pretty clear for years now that the interests of Linux Australia (and of the whole community) lie beyond just Linux ? though Linux is an historic and continuing important manifestation of the underlying spirit. Everything Open! ? Smiles, Les. From craige at mcwhirter.com.au Thu Oct 13 10:29:03 2022 From: craige at mcwhirter.com.au (Craige McWhirter) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 09:29:03 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> At this juncture it looks to me like LA comittee and the community have formally parted ways? The timing is particularly poor. There are reasons that LCA was held the way it was, when it was. "Everything Open embodies Linux Australia's values" - yet the entire site is entirely devoid of any values. (no, Ooen Source is not a value, it's a marketing tool). Transparency would be a good one to start with. What are the values of this conference, if it is replacing LCA? This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow vessel for sponsors. If the community are not involved, how is it grass roots? Like the LA logo, "Everything Open" appears to not represent anything. Do we have a date set for the next AGM? On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 21:07:34 +1000, contact--- via linux-aus wrote: > > Australasia's grassroots Free and Open Source technologies conference, > Everything Open, will be held in Melbourne, Australia from March 14-16 2023. > > Linux Australia is proud to announce Everything Open, a new conference that > will be running in March 2023. > This three day conference will have presentations on a range of open > technologies topics from community members and project leaders. > There will be a key focus on Linux, open source software and open hardware, > as well as the communities that surround them. > > Following two years of online conferences, we know there is an appetite from > many people in our communities to come together in person again. > Everything Open will run in Naarm (Melbourne) across three days, 14-16 > March, at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre. > We realise that some people will need to access the conference from other > locations, and we are working hard to maximise access for all. > > Everything Open is a grassroots conference with a focus on open > technologies, the community that has built up around this movement and the > values that it represents. > The presentations will cover a broad range of subject areas including Linux, > open source software, open hardware, open data, open government, and open > GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums), to name a few. > As we have come to expect, there will be technical deep-dives into specific > topics from project contributors, as well as tutorials on building hardware > or using a piece of software, not to mention talks covering the inner > workings of our communities. > > > ## Call for Sessions > > Our Call for Sessions will open in a couple of weeks. We encourage you to > start thinking about talks to present at the conference, ready to submit a > proposal once the dashboard opens. > > > ## Sponsorship opportunities > > We have a wide range of sponsorship opportunities available. In addition to > sponsoring the conference overall, there are a number of opportunities to > contribute towards specific parts of the event. > If you or your organisation is interested in sponsoring Everything Open, > please get in touch via sponsorship at everythingopen.au > > > ## Stay in the know > > Subscribe to our announcement mailing list and follow our social channels to > be the first to know about ticket sales, speaker lineups and conference > highlights. -- Craige McWhirter Signal: +61 4685 91819 Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From david_crosswell at telaman.net.au Thu Oct 13 10:39:10 2022 From: david_crosswell at telaman.net.au (David) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 09:39:10 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: Some good points, but open source _is_ a value, obvious when it's observed how many avoid it. Obvious when a world is envisaged with or without it. Can you imagine a world where _everything_ was open source? We currently reside in a world where the majority of it isn't, just for comparison. -- David Crosswell Telaman Consultancies P.O. Box 477 100 Edward Street Charleville 4077 Queensland Australia https://www.telaman.net.au On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 09:29, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote: > At this juncture it looks to me like LA comittee and the community > have > formally parted ways? > > The timing is particularly poor. > > There are reasons that LCA was held the way it was, when it was. > > "Everything Open embodies Linux Australia's values" - yet the entire > site is > entirely devoid of any values. (no, Ooen Source is not a value, it's a > marketing tool). Transparency would be a good one to start with. > > What are the values of this conference, if it is replacing LCA? > > This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow > vessel for > sponsors. > > If the community are not involved, how is it grass roots? > > Like the LA logo, "Everything Open" appears to not represent anything. > > Do we have a date set for the next AGM? > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 21:07:34 +1000, contact--- via linux-aus > wrote: >> >> Australasia's grassroots Free and Open Source technologies >> conference, >> Everything Open, will be held in Melbourne, Australia from March >> 14-16 2023. >> >> Linux Australia is proud to announce Everything Open, a new >> conference that >> will be running in March 2023. >> This three day conference will have presentations on a range of open >> technologies topics from community members and project leaders. >> There will be a key focus on Linux, open source software and open >> hardware, >> as well as the communities that surround them. >> >> Following two years of online conferences, we know there is an >> appetite from >> many people in our communities to come together in person again. >> Everything Open will run in Naarm (Melbourne) across three days, >> 14-16 >> March, at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre. >> We realise that some people will need to access the conference from >> other >> locations, and we are working hard to maximise access for all. >> >> Everything Open is a grassroots conference with a focus on open >> technologies, the community that has built up around this movement >> and the >> values that it represents. >> The presentations will cover a broad range of subject areas >> including Linux, >> open source software, open hardware, open data, open government, >> and open >> GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums), to name a few. >> As we have come to expect, there will be technical deep-dives into >> specific >> topics from project contributors, as well as tutorials on building >> hardware >> or using a piece of software, not to mention talks covering the >> inner >> workings of our communities. >> >> >> ## Call for Sessions >> >> Our Call for Sessions will open in a couple of weeks. We encourage >> you to >> start thinking about talks to present at the conference, ready to >> submit a >> proposal once the dashboard opens. >> >> >> ## Sponsorship opportunities >> >> We have a wide range of sponsorship opportunities available. In >> addition to >> sponsoring the conference overall, there are a number of >> opportunities to >> contribute towards specific parts of the event. >> If you or your organisation is interested in sponsoring Everything >> Open, >> please get in touch via sponsorship at everythingopen.au >> >> >> >> ## Stay in the know >> >> Subscribe to our announcement mailing list and follow our social >> channels to >> be the first to know about ticket sales, speaker lineups and >> conference >> highlights. > > -- > Craige McWhirter > Signal: +61 4685 91819 > Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeremy at turnkeylinux.org Thu Oct 13 11:46:14 2022 From: jeremy at turnkeylinux.org (Jeremy Davis) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 11:46:14 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: <1c5ddd5e-36b9-e8b8-5f10-0657e53c3da0@turnkeylinux.org> Hi, A regular lurker but rare poster putting my 2c in here. FYI I've only been to one LCA and had minimal involvement other than that. Hence please take my input in that context... Whilst I get that many use the terms "open source" and "free software" (and/or "FOSS"/"FLOSS") interchangeably (including me at times), as surely shouldn't need to be explained to this forum; they are not the same thing[1][2][3]! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software#Overview [2] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html [3] https://opensource.com/article/17/11/open-source-or-free-software I'm 100% with Craig when he says "Open Source is not a value, it's a marketing tool". It's completely reasonable that the average punter off the street might miss (or not care about) that point, but I doubt that a seasoned Linuxer would. Having "open source values" might work with an uninformed audience, but I suspect that many (such as myself and clearly Craig too) would see that statement as completely vacuous. I get that there is a desire to be open and engaging to all and avoiding any sort elitism. And I also get that as an "average punter" engagement tool "free software" appears to cause some confusion and "open source" has more clarity with that audience - so is likely a better choice. So I don't know what the right answer is. But I feel that if there is any interest in engaging more "freedom" focused types, having "open source values" - without explicit notice of what values that is inferring - is not the way. YMMV... Cheers, Jeremy On 13/10/22 10:39, David via linux-aus wrote: > Some good points, but open source _is_ a value, obvious when it's > observed how many avoid it. > Obvious when a world is envisaged with or without it. > Can you imagine a world where _everything_ was open source? > We currently reside in a world where the majority of it isn't, just for > comparison. > -- > David Crosswell > Telaman Consultancies > P.O. Box 477 > 100 Edward Street > Charleville? 4077 > Queensland > Australia > > https://www.telaman.net.au > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 09:29, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus > wrote: >> At this juncture it looks to me like LA comittee and the community have >> formally parted ways? >> >> The timing is particularly poor. >> >> There are reasons that LCA was held the way it was, when it was. >> >> "Everything Open embodies Linux Australia's values" - yet the entire >> site is >> entirely devoid of any values. (no, Ooen Source is not a value, it's a >> marketing tool). Transparency would be a good one to start with. >> >> What are the values of this conference, if it is replacing LCA? >> >> This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow vessel >> for >> sponsors. >> >> If the community are not involved, how is it grass roots? >> >> Like the LA logo, "Everything Open" appears to not represent anything. >> >> Do we have a date set for the next AGM? >> >> On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 21:07:34 +1000, contact--- via linux-aus wrote: >>> >>> ?Australasia's grassroots Free and Open Source technologies conference, >>> ?Everything Open, will be held in Melbourne, Australia from March >>> 14-16 2023. >>> >>> ?Linux Australia is proud to announce Everything Open, a new >>> conference that >>> ?will be running in March 2023. >>> ?This three day conference will have presentations on a range of open >>> ?technologies topics from community members and project leaders. >>> ?There will be a key focus on Linux, open source software and open >>> hardware, >>> ?as well as the communities that surround them. >>> >>> ?Following two years of online conferences, we know there is an >>> appetite from >>> ?many people in our communities to come together in person again. >>> ?Everything Open will run in Naarm (Melbourne) across three days, 14-16 >>> ?March, at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre. >>> ?We realise that some people will need to access the conference from >>> other >>> ?locations, and we are working hard to maximise access for all. >>> >>> ?Everything Open is a grassroots conference with a focus on open >>> ?technologies, the community that has built up around this movement >>> and the >>> ?values that it represents. >>> ?The presentations will cover a broad range of subject areas >>> including Linux, >>> ?open source software, open hardware, open data, open government, and >>> open >>> ?GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums), to name a few. >>> ?As we have come to expect, there will be technical deep-dives into >>> specific >>> ?topics from project contributors, as well as tutorials on building >>> hardware >>> ?or using a piece of software, not to mention talks covering the inner >>> ?workings of our communities. >>> >>> >>> ?## Call for Sessions >>> >>> ?Our Call for Sessions will open in a couple of weeks. We encourage >>> you to >>> ?start thinking about talks to present at the conference, ready to >>> submit a >>> ?proposal once the dashboard opens. >>> >>> >>> ?## Sponsorship opportunities >>> >>> ?We have a wide range of sponsorship opportunities available. In >>> addition to >>> ?sponsoring the conference overall, there are a number of >>> opportunities to >>> ?contribute towards specific parts of the event. >>> ?If you or your organisation is interested in sponsoring Everything >>> Open, >>> ?please get in touch via sponsorship at everythingopen.au >>> >>> >>> >>> ?## Stay in the know >>> >>> ?Subscribe to our announcement mailing list and follow our social >>> channels to >>> ?be the first to know about ticket sales, speaker lineups and conference >>> ?highlights. >> >> -- >> Craige McWhirter >> Signal: +61 4685 91819 >> Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-aus mailing list >> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >> >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: OpenPGP_signature Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 495 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From david_crosswell at telaman.net.au Thu Oct 13 12:08:12 2022 From: david_crosswell at telaman.net.au (David) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 11:08:12 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <1c5ddd5e-36b9-e8b8-5f10-0657e53c3da0@turnkeylinux.org> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <1c5ddd5e-36b9-e8b8-5f10-0657e53c3da0@turnkeylinux.org> Message-ID: Open source doesn't apply just to software or the Linux aspect. It's a principle and, as such, a value. Anybody who fails to see the value inherent in transparency in government, or open access to education (in the broadest definition of the word), yes, `vacuous' is the term. Cheers! -- David Crosswell Telaman Consultancies P.O. Box 477 100 Edward Street Charleville 4077 Queensland Australia https://www.telaman.net.au On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 11:46, Jeremy Davis via linux-aus wrote: > Hi, > > A regular lurker but rare poster putting my 2c in here. FYI I've only > been to one LCA and had minimal involvement other than that. Hence > please take my input in that context... > > Whilst I get that many use the terms "open source" and "free software" > (and/or "FOSS"/"FLOSS") interchangeably (including me at times), as > surely shouldn't need to be explained to this forum; they are not the > same thing[1][2][3]! > > [1] > > [2] > > [3] > > > I'm 100% with Craig when he says "Open Source is not a value, it's a > marketing tool". It's completely reasonable that the average punter > off > the street might miss (or not care about) that point, but I doubt > that a > seasoned Linuxer would. > > Having "open source values" might work with an uninformed audience, > but > I suspect that many (such as myself and clearly Craig too) would see > that statement as completely vacuous. > > I get that there is a desire to be open and engaging to all and > avoiding > any sort elitism. And I also get that as an "average punter" > engagement > tool "free software" appears to cause some confusion and "open source" > has more clarity with that audience - so is likely a better choice. > > So I don't know what the right answer is. But I feel that if there is > any interest in engaging more "freedom" focused types, having "open > source values" - without explicit notice of what values that is > inferring - is not the way. > > YMMV... > > Cheers, > Jeremy > > On 13/10/22 10:39, David via linux-aus wrote: >> Some good points, but open source _is_ a value, obvious when it's >> observed how many avoid it. >> Obvious when a world is envisaged with or without it. >> Can you imagine a world where _everything_ was open source? >> We currently reside in a world where the majority of it isn't, just >> for >> comparison. >> -- >> David Crosswell >> Telaman Consultancies >> P.O. Box 477 >> 100 Edward Street >> Charleville 4077 >> Queensland >> Australia >> >> https://www.telaman.net.au >> >> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 09:29, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus >> > >> wrote: >>> At this juncture it looks to me like LA comittee and the community >>> have >>> formally parted ways? >>> >>> The timing is particularly poor. >>> >>> There are reasons that LCA was held the way it was, when it was. >>> >>> "Everything Open embodies Linux Australia's values" - yet the entire >>> site is >>> entirely devoid of any values. (no, Ooen Source is not a value, >>> it's a >>> marketing tool). Transparency would be a good one to start with. >>> >>> What are the values of this conference, if it is replacing LCA? >>> >>> This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow >>> vessel >>> for >>> sponsors. >>> >>> If the community are not involved, how is it grass roots? >>> >>> Like the LA logo, "Everything Open" appears to not represent >>> anything. >>> >>> Do we have a date set for the next AGM? >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 21:07:34 +1000, contact--- via linux-aus >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Australasia's grassroots Free and Open Source technologies >>>> conference, >>>> Everything Open, will be held in Melbourne, Australia from March >>>> 14-16 2023. >>>> >>>> Linux Australia is proud to announce Everything Open, a new >>>> conference that >>>> will be running in March 2023. >>>> This three day conference will have presentations on a range of >>>> open >>>> technologies topics from community members and project leaders. >>>> There will be a key focus on Linux, open source software and open >>>> hardware, >>>> as well as the communities that surround them. >>>> >>>> Following two years of online conferences, we know there is an >>>> appetite from >>>> many people in our communities to come together in person again. >>>> Everything Open will run in Naarm (Melbourne) across three days, >>>> 14-16 >>>> March, at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre. >>>> We realise that some people will need to access the conference >>>> from >>>> other >>>> locations, and we are working hard to maximise access for all. >>>> >>>> Everything Open is a grassroots conference with a focus on open >>>> technologies, the community that has built up around this movement >>>> and the >>>> values that it represents. >>>> The presentations will cover a broad range of subject areas >>>> including Linux, >>>> open source software, open hardware, open data, open government, >>>> and >>>> open >>>> GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums), to name a few. >>>> As we have come to expect, there will be technical deep-dives into >>>> specific >>>> topics from project contributors, as well as tutorials on building >>>> hardware >>>> or using a piece of software, not to mention talks covering the >>>> inner >>>> workings of our communities. >>>> >>>> >>>> ## Call for Sessions >>>> >>>> Our Call for Sessions will open in a couple of weeks. We encourage >>>> you to >>>> start thinking about talks to present at the conference, ready to >>>> submit a >>>> proposal once the dashboard opens. >>>> >>>> >>>> ## Sponsorship opportunities >>>> >>>> We have a wide range of sponsorship opportunities available. In >>>> addition to >>>> sponsoring the conference overall, there are a number of >>>> opportunities to >>>> contribute towards specific parts of the event. >>>> If you or your organisation is interested in sponsoring Everything >>>> Open, >>>> please get in touch via sponsorship at everythingopen.au >>>> >>>> <> >>>> >>>> >>>> ## Stay in the know >>>> >>>> Subscribe to our announcement mailing list and follow our social >>>> channels to >>>> be the first to know about ticket sales, speaker lineups and >>>> conference >>>> highlights. >>> >>> -- >>> Craige McWhirter >>> Signal: +61 4685 91819 >>> Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io >>> _______________________________________________ >>> linux-aus mailing list >>> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >>> <> >>> <> >>> >>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >>> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au >>> >>> <> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-aus mailing list >> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >> >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au >> > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paulway at mabula.net Thu Oct 13 12:19:31 2022 From: paulway at mabula.net (Paul Wayper) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 12:19:31 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: <93355cd2-0ded-4ec9-90e9-fcfeee1ecdc0@app.fastmail.com> I'm trying to respond to your email at a high level, Craige, rather than addressing it point by point. I too am disappointed about the lack of transparency about this change in the focus of what seems to be Linux Australia's premiere conference. I feel like there were a lot of ways in which Linux Australia could have communicated its plans and intentions better. We, the community, could have been brought along for the ride rather than announced at. There seems to be an obvious contradiction about an "Open Everything" conference in which the decisions about the format, size, and context for the conference were kept closed. I've talked with a number of people and they've talked about the idea of "well, if you want a Linux-specific conference, why don't (we|you) run one as well as this new conference". Yes, that's possible - but it also splits the community and creates a lot more work. It's also hard for me to see Linux Australia (or Open Australia, which I assume is going to be the next rebranding) supporting a second 'open source' conference. "Why don't you just add your conference things to ours?" would be the obvious response. I'm not sure if there's even been an announcement from Linux Australia that they want teams to bid for where the next Open Everything conference will be, never mind another completely separate conference. I don't think this is a cynical money-making exercise or a hollow sell-out to corporate advertising. I think the LA council is genuinely trying to take what LCA had become - a conference about open source, open hardware, open government, and other aspects of Free/Libre culture - and give it a new name and a new energy. They've said that they received no bids for LCA 2023 so they've had to take on the organising role themselves. I don't have any criticism for the Open Everything conference per se. But I really feel that disconnect between the LA Council and the rest of us - LCA attendees, LA members, open source enthusiasts on the list. The silence. The brusque answers to questions about LCA's future. Kathy's accusations. The sudden announcement, with changes of time of year and format and not much other detail. I feel like there's a lot of expectation that we will see all the invisible hard work that the LA Council has done and all their invisible good intentions and just immediately be on board, clamouring to volunteer and submit talks and attend. I'd like the LA Council to consider being more open about what's on the agenda. What are you deciding on? Where can we help? What do you think our shared future holds? Maybe the community will have some ideas and suggestions? I will continue to try to assume positive intent. Hope this helps, Paul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au Thu Oct 13 12:55:44 2022 From: russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au (Russell Stuart) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 11:55:44 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: On 13/10/22 09:29, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote: > At this juncture it looks to me like LA comittee and the community have > formally parted ways? I'm responding to this even though I will probably be frowned upon by my fellow LA executive members. It's possible LA and the community have parted ways. I don't know for sure. But if so, it's the community that's changed, not LA. LA is doing what it has always done. It funds open source conferences. For those of you who don't know, it works roughly like this: a bunch of bunnies decide they want to do the work of running a conference on a volunteer basis, they approach LA for funding and logistics, LA makes them jump through some hoops to prove it's likely the conference won't make a loss (I can't recall a proposal that didn't make it through the hoops), and it happens. The reason there is no LCA 2023 is no one put up a proposal to run it. In fact no one put up a proposal to run LCA 2022 either. You seem to be thinking this was a deliberate choice by LA. The evidence in the public domain says otherwise - LA repeatedly asked for bids to run LCA 2023 (and LCA 2022), and got none. What "LA" did receive this year, after it was obvious the community wasn't interested in running LCA 2023, was a proposal to run OE 2023. The proposal was formally voted on last night, and I voted yes. Not because I prefer OE format over LCA 2023 (I don't) but on the grounds I always use - do the bunnies look like a dedicated mob that will see it through to the end, is it somehow related to open source, and is it unlikely to make a loss. The proposal clearly met all those criteria. The LA above is in quotes because the people who put up the proposal are mostly the LA exec. Mostly, because I'm one of the lazy ones. I was only vaguely aware my somewhat secretive fellow exec members were thinking of it, and have had no involvement in it?s planning. When they delivered their formal budget to LA the secret was out of course, because as treasurer of LA I took a long hard look at the budget they put up, followed up on costings and quotes. But that?s no different to any other conference proposal. I have no inside information on what their motivations for doing it or choosing the format that did. But the motivations aren't hard to guess - I know all of them are die hard fans of open source conferences and they didn't want to see COVID kill Australia's tradition of having them. I have absolutely no idea what drove the format change, but here the golden rule of open source applies: he who does the work makes the rules. It's not the first time a radically different format for LCA was proposed. The only difference is on previous occasions, LA has always had an alternate proposal to run a "traditional" LCA alongside the radical one, and historically it's *always* chosen the traditional proposal. But that choice wasn't available this time. If you, or anyone feels strongly that LCA should come back you can make it happen. I think LA is one of open source hidden treasures, literally. If you come to LA with a proposal to run an open source conference, LA will loan you a years salary (a Google employee's salary even) to make it happen. LA asks for no security, or anything else beyond your word it's going to be a great open source conference run prudently. If it all goes sour (and it has), then LA wears the loss without complaint, and has in the past funded the same conference the next year. Partially because of LA's corporate reputation, you are likely to attract sponsors that will fund most of it. It's almost like an open invitation to have an open source bash for you and your mates at the corporate sponsors expense. And if you pull it off, you?ll learn a lot about your craft, realise somewhat to your amazement you are capable of creating and organising a team of 100 people that work together to deliver something fantastic, and earn the accolades of everyone who attends. It's one helluva deal, and one helluva of an experience. I've done it myself a few times, and heartily recommend it. If you want an LCA format conference to come back, all you have to do is take advantage of it. From david_crosswell at telaman.net.au Thu Oct 13 13:02:16 2022 From: david_crosswell at telaman.net.au (David) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 12:02:16 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: Thank you, Russell, for that clarification. -- David Crosswell Telaman Consultancies P.O. Box 477 100 Edward Street Charleville 4077 Queensland Australia https://www.telaman.net.au On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 11:55, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > On 13/10/22 09:29, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote: >> At this juncture it looks to me like LA comittee and the community >> have >> formally parted ways? > > I'm responding to this even though I will probably be frowned upon by > my fellow LA executive members. > > It's possible LA and the community have parted ways. I don't know for > sure. But if so, it's the community that's changed, not LA. > > LA is doing what it has always done. It funds open source > conferences. For those of you who don't know, it works roughly like > this: a bunch of bunnies decide they want to do the work of running a > conference on a volunteer basis, they approach LA for funding and > logistics, LA makes them jump through some hoops to prove it's likely > the conference won't make a loss (I can't recall a proposal that > didn't make it through the hoops), and it happens. > > The reason there is no LCA 2023 is no one put up a proposal to run > it. In fact no one put up a proposal to run LCA 2022 either. You seem > to be thinking this was a deliberate choice by LA. The evidence in > the public domain says otherwise - LA repeatedly asked for bids to > run LCA 2023 (and LCA 2022), and got none. > > What "LA" did receive this year, after it was obvious the community > wasn't interested in running LCA 2023, was a proposal to run OE 2023. > The proposal was formally voted on last night, and I voted yes. Not > because I prefer OE format over LCA 2023 (I don't) but on the grounds > I always use - do the bunnies look like a dedicated mob that will see > it through to the end, is it somehow related to open source, and is > it unlikely to make a loss. The proposal clearly met all those > criteria. > > The LA above is in quotes because the people who put up the proposal > are mostly the LA exec. Mostly, because I'm one of the lazy ones. I > was only vaguely aware my somewhat secretive fellow exec members were > thinking of it, and have had no involvement in it?s planning. When > they delivered their formal budget to LA the secret was out of > course, because as treasurer of LA I took a long hard look at the > budget they put up, followed up on costings and quotes. But that?s > no different to any other conference proposal. > > I have no inside information on what their motivations for doing it > or choosing the format that did. But the motivations aren't hard to > guess - I know all of them are die hard fans of open source > conferences and they didn't want to see COVID kill Australia's > tradition of having them. I have absolutely no idea what drove the > format change, but here the golden rule of open source applies: he > who does the work makes the rules. It's not the first time a > radically different format for LCA was proposed. The only difference > is on previous occasions, LA has always had an alternate proposal to > run a "traditional" LCA alongside the radical one, and historically > it's *always* chosen the traditional proposal. But that choice wasn't > available this time. > > If you, or anyone feels strongly that LCA should come back you can > make it happen. I think LA is one of open source hidden treasures, > literally. If you come to LA with a proposal to run an open source > conference, LA will loan you a years salary (a Google employee's > salary even) to make it happen. LA asks for no security, or anything > else beyond your word it's going to be a great open source conference > run prudently. If it all goes sour (and it has), then LA wears the > loss without complaint, and has in the past funded the same > conference the next year. Partially because of LA's corporate > reputation, you are likely to attract sponsors that will fund most of > it. It's almost like an open invitation to have an open source bash > for you and your mates at the corporate sponsors expense. And if you > pull it off, you?ll learn a lot about your craft, realise somewhat > to your amazement you are capable of creating and organising a team > of 100 people that work together to deliver something fantastic, and > earn the accolades of everyone who attends. > > It's one helluva deal, and one helluva of an experience. I've done it > myself a few times, and heartily recommend it. If you want an LCA > format conference to come back, all you have to do is take advantage > of it. > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lloy0076 at adam.com.au Thu Oct 13 13:17:26 2022 From: lloy0076 at adam.com.au (David Lloyd) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2022 22:17:26 -0400 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: <497b48a4-e54d-7f03-253b-4529d639b736@adam.com.au> ``` class EverythingOpen extends Conference { ? $name = 'EverythingOpen' } $it = new EverythingOpen() if (!($it instanceof Conference) ) die() // We're not dead class LinuxConfAu extends Conference { ??? $name= 'LinuxConfAu' } $it2 = new LinuxConfAu() if (!($it2 instanceof Conference) ) die() // We're still not dead ``` The task: * Could we Ducktype 'it' as 'it2'? Probably yes. Are we really just arguing over a confounded name? On 12/10/2022 7:29 pm, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote: > At this juncture it looks to me like LA comittee and the community have > formally parted ways? > > The timing is particularly poor. > > There are reasons that LCA was held the way it was, when it was. > > "Everything Open embodies Linux Australia's values" - yet the entire site is > entirely devoid of any values. (no, Ooen Source is not a value, it's a > marketing tool). Transparency would be a good one to start with. > > What are the values of this conference, if it is replacing LCA? > > This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow vessel for > sponsors. > > If the community are not involved, how is it grass roots? > > Like the LA logo, "Everything Open" appears to not represent anything. > > Do we have a date set for the next AGM? > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 21:07:34 +1000, contact--- via linux-aus wrote: >> Australasia's grassroots Free and Open Source technologies conference, >> Everything Open, will be held in Melbourne, Australia from March 14-16 2023. >> >> Linux Australia is proud to announce Everything Open, a new conference that >> will be running in March 2023. >> This three day conference will have presentations on a range of open >> technologies topics from community members and project leaders. >> There will be a key focus on Linux, open source software and open hardware, >> as well as the communities that surround them. >> >> Following two years of online conferences, we know there is an appetite from >> many people in our communities to come together in person again. >> Everything Open will run in Naarm (Melbourne) across three days, 14-16 >> March, at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre. >> We realise that some people will need to access the conference from other >> locations, and we are working hard to maximise access for all. >> >> Everything Open is a grassroots conference with a focus on open >> technologies, the community that has built up around this movement and the >> values that it represents. >> The presentations will cover a broad range of subject areas including Linux, >> open source software, open hardware, open data, open government, and open >> GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums), to name a few. >> As we have come to expect, there will be technical deep-dives into specific >> topics from project contributors, as well as tutorials on building hardware >> or using a piece of software, not to mention talks covering the inner >> workings of our communities. >> >> >> ## Call for Sessions >> >> Our Call for Sessions will open in a couple of weeks. We encourage you to >> start thinking about talks to present at the conference, ready to submit a >> proposal once the dashboard opens. >> >> >> ## Sponsorship opportunities >> >> We have a wide range of sponsorship opportunities available. In addition to >> sponsoring the conference overall, there are a number of opportunities to >> contribute towards specific parts of the event. >> If you or your organisation is interested in sponsoring Everything Open, >> please get in touch via sponsorship at everythingopen.au >> >> >> ## Stay in the know >> >> Subscribe to our announcement mailing list and follow our social channels to >> be the first to know about ticket sales, speaker lineups and conference >> highlights. > -- > Craige McWhirter > Signal: +61 4685 91819 > Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au From tim at wirejunkie.com Thu Oct 13 18:39:19 2022 From: tim at wirejunkie.com (Tim Serong) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 18:39:19 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: <6347C0A7.8080001@wirejunkie.com> On 13/10/22 10:29, Craige McWhirter wrote: > [...] > This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow vessel for > sponsors. Really Craige? REALLY? I honestly can't believe you'd even *think* LA would be involved in something like that, let alone put it in print. As for the rest of your comments, I'm pretty sure they're largely addressed by Russell Stuart's subsequent email (thanks Russell, BTW). Regards, Tim From bod at c47.org Thu Oct 13 21:37:15 2022 From: bod at c47.org (Brendan O'Dea) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 21:37:15 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 at 10:29, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote: > At this juncture it looks to me like LA comittee and the community have > formally parted ways? > > The timing is particularly poor. > > There are reasons that LCA was held the way it was, when it was. > > "Everything Open embodies Linux Australia's values" - yet the entire site is > entirely devoid of any values. (no, Ooen Source is not a value, it's a > marketing tool). Transparency would be a good one to start with. > > What are the values of this conference, if it is replacing LCA? > > This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow vessel for > sponsors. Back in the day, when physical magazines used to be a thing that people subscribed to, I was a subscriber of _Unix World_, which was a fairly technical journal from which I learned a bunch of stuff, including the existence of this crazy new scripting language, Perl. It was interesting, and quirky: one of my favourite columns was _Devil's Advocate_, penned by the inimitable Stan Kelly-Bootle. A decade after the magazine was launched, it changed its name to _Open Computing_, dropped the more technical articles and started to include stuff about Windows NT which was "open" in the sense that the APIs were published. It ceased being something that a working programmer would be interested in, and became the kind of thing that MIS managers had on the shelves behind their desk to show that they were "still technical." "It was a mistake they never recovered from," says Andrew Binstock, editor-in-chief of Unix Review, one of the few surviving publications in this field. "They expected that by broadening their franchise, they would be able to bring on board more advertisers. What happened is that they lost their identity." ? http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HkoBzYFxItMJ:www.uniforum.org/news/html/publications/ufm/feb96/behindnews.html linux.conf.au is an identity. One which even hinged on the crazy domain name which was technically not meant to exist, until someone managed to talk kre into some kind of leave-pass which allowed us to use it, but only around the conference time (http://geonic.net/index.php?section=terms&subsection=AU&lang=RU#confau). The time restriction appears to have been lifted. No shade on the organisers of "Everything Open," I'm quite sure that the motivation is pure, and the intent is to extend the range beyond just Linux and include the Free/Net/OpenBSD folks for example. I wish them all the best. I just wonder if there are cautionary tales to be learned from using the term "Open" when the intention is to say "Free." --bod From russell at coker.com.au Thu Oct 13 21:40:02 2022 From: russell at coker.com.au (Russell Coker) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 21:40:02 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: <6766569.MhkbZ0Pkbq@xev> On Thursday, 13 October 2022 12:55:44 AEDT Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > The reason there is no LCA 2023 is no one put up a proposal to run it. > In fact no one put up a proposal to run LCA 2022 either. You seem to be > thinking this was a deliberate choice by LA. The evidence in the public > domain says otherwise - LA repeatedly asked for bids to run LCA 2023 > (and LCA 2022), and got none. > > What "LA" did receive this year, after it was obvious the community > wasn't interested in running LCA 2023, was a proposal to run OE 2023. > The proposal was formally voted on last night, and I voted yes. Not > because I prefer OE format over LCA 2023 (I don't) but on the grounds I > always use - do the bunnies look like a dedicated mob that will see it > through to the end, is it somehow related to open source, and is it > unlikely to make a loss. The proposal clearly met all those criteria. This all makes sense, and was pretty much what I expected. It's been apparent for some time that LCA was evolving to be more about general open source and open hardware which IMHO is not a problem. It's also been apparent that it's increasingly difficult to find volunteers to run LCA. It appears to me that Covid19 just accellerated changes that were already happening. I think this will be a good conference and I'll be involved as long as it's not an in-person conference. More conferences would be good. Conferences don't need to be as big as LCA. It seems that OE is going to be the big conference, niche conferences could be the other thing. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ From russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au Thu Oct 13 23:30:03 2022 From: russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au (Russell Stuart) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 22:30:03 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: <3f3daa13-0a4d-8ad0-97db-7e242a6f7c32@stuart.id.au> On 13/10/22 16:13, Anthony Towns wrote: > As far as I can tell there was no call for bids for LCA 2022 at all, > but rather the LCA 2021 conference got deferred to 2022 due to Covid, > then became online only for the same reason. LCA 2021 was run, not deferred: https://lca2021.linux.org.au/ LCA 2022 was a separate conference. https://lca2022.linux.org.au/ Since the team that won 2021 didn't get to hold an "in person" LCA and they wanted to, the plan was they to run it in 2022. But then COVID continued, and they weren't so interested in running an online conference. There was chaos for a while. No time to call for another bid, so the LA exec did most of the heavy lifting. > For LCA 2023, as far as I can tell, there was a single call for bids Yes, there was only one call for LCA 2023. But to be fair, the call is more of a formality as teams don't wait for calls. This time there was dead silence before and after. Also notice during this time when the LA exec was supposed to be doing LA things like calling for bids, they were organising an LCA. > Maybe the lack of LCA 2023 bids was raised at the 2022 AGM? Yes, it was raised. I recall pointing out COVID hasn't just effected LCA, all conference activity is down. It seems online only conferences aren't popular with potential organisers. I think I said something along the lines of "the community appears to have reached it's COVID limits". >> The proposal was formally voted on last night, and I voted yes. > > It seems odd that it was announced weeks before being voted on? It could have been done differently, and probably should have been done differently. Under normal circumstances it may well have. But a new committee being elected without anybody expressing the slightest interest in running the next LCA is not normal. It is a first in my time on council. You've been on the committee yourself. It takes time to get your bearings. There were definitely months lost over the first few committee meetings while we discussed what to do about the lack of bids. Do we cancel it? Do we approach people directly? In the end they apparently resolved it by some on the committee steeling themselves into doing something themselves, for a second time. But I imagine that decision meant they had to find additional volunteers, potential venues have to be investigated, quotes obtained. I've done all this and it took me literally months of effort. That planning is normally done as part of the bid - done in the year before. Yes in the mean time people were asking what was happening. But what do you say officially, when you weren't sure yourself if this wild idea would pan out? I think they did a reasonable approximation of the right thing. It was not announced until a budget has been prepared with quotes, and presented to the treasurer (me, who was not aware they were doing this) for independent approval. If you care for my opinion - at the very conservative attendance numbers I thought it wouldn't make a loss. It was announced not long after that. Yes, a formal vote should have been taken then I guess, but people who were supposed to remember the order things have to be done were now heads down bum up organising a conference. And as you say: > But I guess having 5 out of 7 council members on the conference organising team makes it easy to ensure any votes pass, so perhaps going through the motions doesn't matter. I'm not sure what would have happened if I has said it didn't look financially viable. But as I said, it looked as good as any bid can do, given all the unknowns. Given 6 out of 7 agree the formal vote was more a case of dotting i's and crossing t's. And they were duly dotted and crossed. > Is "open" meant to be an actual value, or just a meaningless marketing gimmick like saying something's "great value"? The answer to that philosophical question is above my pay grade. But in a practical sense, in this particular situation, I very much doubt more openness would have helped. I can't recall what was officially said at LCA 2022, but I'm sure by the closing most people knew there were no bids. The seriousness of the situation was made plain at the AGM, and if nothing else, the absence of the big reveal of where the next LCA would be was a bit of a give away. I'm not sure what you would have volunteers who made up the new exec should do in that situation aj. What they did do was step up and run volunteer to run a conference themselves. The only other option was cancel it. Yes, it was on their own terms, so it's cut down. I guess that's what they thought they could cope with he 2nd time around. Yes, they changed the name. But it's a conference name, and in a conference name using "Open" instead of "Linux" is a marketing choice, not a philosophical one. Maybe it won't attract the bigger audience they are hoping for - we will see. I think it's worth doing the experiment. The conference content won't be changing - it's been about everything open source for well over a decade now. From akumria at acm.org Fri Oct 14 01:24:50 2022 From: akumria at acm.org (Anand Kumria) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 01:24:50 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] linux.conf.au domain history was: Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: On Thu, 13 Oct 2022, at 21:37, Brendan O'Dea via linux-aus wrote: > > linux.conf.au is an identity. One which even hinged on the crazy > domain name which was technically not meant to exist, until someone > managed to talk kre into some kind of leave-pass which allowed us to > use it, but only around the conference time > (http://geonic.net/index.php?section=terms&subsection=AU&lang=RU#confau). > The time restriction appears to have been lifted. I think I was just doggedly emailing him - I recall quite a lot of to and fro. And debugging lots of DNS (which I was unfamiliar with at the time) to satisfy him. But I did save his response indicating the domain was now active for posterity: Jon was involved in ensuring the domain would continue to be available for conference use (see: http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/announce/2011-June/000117.html ) Cheers, Anand >From my records: From: Robert Elz To: Anand Kumria cc: ls.organisers at cse.unsw.edu.au, slug-committee at progsoc.uts.edu.au Subject: Re: .conf.au registration In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 02 Jun 2000 21:42:59 +1000." <20000602214259.R4136 at ftoomsh.progsoc.uts.edu.au> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 04:16:51 +1000 Message-ID: <8886.962043411 at fuchsia.home.cs.mu.OZ.AU> Sender: kre at munnari.OZ.AU Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 21:42:59 +1000 From: Anand Kumria Message-ID: <20000602214259.R4136 at ftoomsh.progsoc.uts.edu.au> | We would like to register the domain linux.conf.au for an upcoming | conference that we intend to put on early next Janruary. This is set up now. The domain is set to expire on March 1st, 2001. Please leave the nameservers running until after you have seen the delegation vanish from here - if that doesn't happen and you want to close down the nameservers, please send me a reminder. kre -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrew at donnellan.id.au Fri Oct 14 02:36:11 2022 From: andrew at donnellan.id.au (Andrew Donnellan) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 02:36:11 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <6766569.MhkbZ0Pkbq@xev> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <6766569.MhkbZ0Pkbq@xev> Message-ID: On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 at 21:40, Russell Coker via linux-aus < linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > More conferences would be good. Conferences don't need to be as big as > LCA. > It seems that OE is going to be the big conference, niche conferences > could be > the other thing. Vague long-term thoughts - noting I have no idea what kind of format EO's organisers anticipate adopting, etc etc - if EO successfully takes off and succeeds LCA as LA's flagship conference, as a shorter event it could become the centrepiece of an open source conferences season that co-locates niche events either side. Experiment with dedicated events for {$language, $distro, kernel development, sysadmins, gamedev, etc} that are more independent and bigger/smaller/more fancy/less fancy/funded differently (as appropriate) than an LCA miniconf, and still lets distant attendees justify buying a ticket because they'll also be able to throw in EO before/after. Conversely, you can also attract the people who would have been interested in your LCA miniconf but aren't interested in paying for a full week of LCA, because your event will be separate from EO. Like many on this list, I have a few reservations with how the EO announcement happened, and yes, I'm a bit scared of the prospect of losing some of the LCA magic if the old LCA doesn't return - but I'm hoping it'll reinvigorate interest in LA and break us out of the current cycle where we struggle to find volunteers making LCA a touch-and-go affair every year. (I have vague dreams - and ~zero energy to pursue personally, at least for the next ~2-3 years thanks to my commitments on other organisations' committees - of seeing a Linux Plumbers-style event take off in the Asia-Pacific region, and if such an event were to happen in Australia, it would make a lot of sense for it to sit alongside EO.) -- Andrew Donnellan http://andrew.donnellan.id.au andrew at donnellan.id.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From info at petermoulding.com Fri Oct 14 10:56:04 2022 From: info at petermoulding.com (Info) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 10:56:04 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <6766569.MhkbZ0Pkbq@xev> Message-ID: As a past conference guest, I find wide ranging conferences difficult. So much old stuff rehashed for new users. I like sessions focussed on people developing new stuff. If the new conference is 3 days and the only things of interest are an hour on day 1 and an hour on day 3, I will not attend. The mini conference idea was good. A day for PHP, a day for something else. Buy tickets to just the days of interest. Video conferencing works for some things and not for others. Perhaps the EO conference can have sessions accessed by video for mass distribution to those who can only benefit from a few sessions. My experience includes speaking at conferences, organising conferences, and inventing a conference before video options appeared. I think the future is video for lectures and hands on for workshops. Perhaps the EO conference could be video across a week then follow up workshops we can book after watching the videos. They could cover everything then the audience could select just the relevant workshops before booking travel. This would let someone choose their interests, Linux Intel or Raspberry Pi or both as an example. More importantly, it would help experienced people skip the sales pitches and intro stuff. Peter From russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au Fri Oct 14 12:25:44 2022 From: russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au (Russell Stuart) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 11:25:44 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <3f3daa13-0a4d-8ad0-97db-7e242a6f7c32@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: On 14/10/22 10:40, Anthony Towns wrote: > Isn't the point of the LA council to make sure that these things get > done despite the conference team being busy doing real work? Isn't that > a reason why the council running a conference is a bad idea? Of course it's a bad idea. But it seems the majority of the exec thought not having a conference was an even worse idea. In the interests of transparency I'll try to explain why they might think that. "Might" because while it has been discussed many times, I can't speak for anyone but me. The general consensus is that COVID hit us pretty hard. After running one online conference no one was stepping up to run a second one. My own experience is while I loved being at in-person LCA's, I would find it very hard to ramp up enough enthusiasm to attend a third purely online one. Anecdotally seems to true for all conferences, not just LCA. Now that COVID lock downs have passed the committee's general consensus is people in the open source movement still want to attend open source conferences - the enthusiasm for in-person conferences hasn't gone away. But now we have a problem - it's the people who attended previous conferences who step up to run the next one, but no one is stepping up after the online conferences. So the idea is the exec will boot strap the process again by running a conference. As you say, it's not ideal, in fact I personally doubt it's sustainable - burning out the exec seems inevitable if it continues. But for the life of me, I can't think of a better way forward. If you have one, it would be really helpful is you shared it. From mattcen at mattcen.com Fri Oct 14 13:00:10 2022 From: mattcen at mattcen.com (Matt Cengia) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 13:00:10 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <3f3daa13-0a4d-8ad0-97db-7e242a6f7c32@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: Hey folks, Firstly, thanks to Russell for your contributions to this thread; I appreciate and generally agree with your perspective. To everyone who is frustrated at the way this conference and its announcement came about, I'd like to remind you all that every year the Linux Australia committee is elected *by us*, the LA community, in the lead-up to the AGM traditionally held at LCA. We, the member of LA, elect this committee to lead the organisation and make important decisions. Necessarily, they can't bring *every* decision to the rest of the LA members, because we'd talk about and debate it on this mailing list and get nothing done. As such, it makes sense for them to wield the power *we gave them* as voting members of LA, to make hard and important decisions like this one. And if nobody else put their hand up to run a conference, what is a committee to do? Either they cancel it, run it as it was run before, in the full knowledge that it was a huge struggle, or try something different, putting in a bunch of their own effort to just, to put it bluntly, Get Shit Done. I applaud their audacity in making this risky decision, and wish them all the energy to bring it to fruition. For many years I've considered putting in a bid to run LCA myself (and indeed, many current and prior LA committee members and LCA organisers have suggested that I should), but alas I run too many other events to have the energy to make such a big commitment. It's *ok* to not have the energy to run an event of this size, but it's *not* OK to then go and criticise the people who make the sacrifices necessary to do so when nobody else will. Be the change you want to see in the world, and in this community. On Fri, Oct 14, 2022, at 12:25, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > On 14/10/22 10:40, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Isn't the point of the LA council to make sure that these things get > > done despite the conference team being busy doing real work? Isn't that > > a reason why the council running a conference is a bad idea? > > Of course it's a bad idea. But it seems the majority of the exec > thought not having a conference was an even worse idea. ... > But for the life of me, I can't think of a better way forward. If you > have one, it would be really helpful is you shared it. -- Matt Cengia (pronouns: they/them/theirs ) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 963 bytes Desc: not available URL: From paulway at mabula.net Sat Oct 15 09:16:10 2022 From: paulway at mabula.net (Paul Wayper) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 09:16:10 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> Message-ID: <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> On 13/10/22 12:55 pm, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > The reason there is no LCA 2023 is no one put up a proposal to run it. In > fact no one put up a proposal to run LCA 2022 either. I feel I have to speak out here. Russell, I'm not sure if you're aware, but there _WAS_ a proposal for LCA 2022.? James Iseppi and I and a team of other people put one together.? We submitted it in February 2021, although I'm just going on memory here and I can find the emails if you want. The LA Council summarily dismissed the bid.? No conversation was entered into.? We were told it wasn't suitable. > You seem to be thinking this was a deliberate choice by LA. The evidence in > the public domain says otherwise - LA repeatedly asked for bids to run LCA > 2023 (and LCA 2022), and got none. Well, Russell, I have to assume you weren't part of the team that reviewed our bid when you make that statement.? I have to assume that the people that did review our bid did not tell you about it.? That or you're just forgetting our bid because it was deemed unsuitable.? Maybe you meant "LA [...] got no[ bids that it accepted]."? I don't know.? Maybe you use "the public domain" quite literally there, and are excluding our bid because we did not announce it on the linux-aus list (which, AFAICS, is how the LA Council wants these things to work). I really don't want to hash over how we put the bid together, working with ANU from the previous LCA 2021 Canberra bid.? I'm still pissed off at the way LA handled it.? That annoyance colours my judgement of how the LA Council has handled the announcement of the Everything Open conference.? So I'm trying to put those feelings aside and work with what the LA Council has decided to do.? I'm happy to discuss our bid and what happened to it via direct email, but I won't discuss it on the list. Regards, Paul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au Sat Oct 15 10:33:54 2022 From: russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au (Russell Stuart) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 09:33:54 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> Message-ID: <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> On 15/10/22 08:16, Paul Wayper via linux-aus wrote: > The LA Council summarily dismissed the bid.? No conversation was entered > into.? We were told it wasn't suitable. The bid was for a hybrid in-person/online conference, and it made it clear the team was not interested in running a purely online conference. The proposal was put in while COVID was in full swing. It was effectively "betting" the COVID restrictions would be lifted. I can tell you what was going through my mind at the time. As a reminder, at the time the proposal was put up we had stories of people getting out of the plane at home only to find a snap decision made while they were in the air meant they had to go into quarantine for 2 weeks. Council members had been told by their employers personal interstate travel was not acceptable. Hotels and airlines were being very cagey about giving refunds travel and accommodation that COVID later made impossible. What we had before us was a proposal for a conference that had most attendees coming from outside of the state, and those attendees would have to book accommodation and travel a month or two in advance. As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of 2022. Finally, the current executive was surprised by your characterisation of the communications from the 2021 council, so this morning we dug up their written response to the bid. Yes, it said the TL;DR is a motion was moved to accept the bid, but it failed for lack of votes. It didn't reveal the private deliberations of the council of course, but it did discuss the ruminations that happened in general terms. I won't publish the full response here (it's quite lengthy and maybe you would prefer we didn't do that, but feel free to do it yourself). Instead here are two quotes from it: - We have also discussed the current COVID-19 situation - We would like to extend an invitation to this team to submit a bid for LCA2023 From andrew at sericyb.com.au Sat Oct 15 11:03:49 2022 From: andrew at sericyb.com.au (Andrew Pam) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 11:03:49 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of 2022. COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see a fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. Sadly many of us are still not able to attend any in-person conferences. The premature decrease in protections and reporting is revealing who our society doesn't value. Regards, Andrew -- mailto:andrew at sericyb.com.au Andrew Pam https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings From noel.butler at ausics.net Sat Oct 15 11:12:47 2022 From: noel.butler at ausics.net (Noel Butler) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 10:12:47 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: <8f0d8bb64084e54f1f2dbc7ac029b246@ausics.net> On 15/10/2022 10:03, Andrew Pam via linux-aus wrote: > On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > >> As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of >> 2022. > > COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see > a fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. > Sadly many of us are still not able to attend any in-person > conferences. The premature decrease in protections and reporting is > revealing who our society doesn't value. > > Regards, > Andrew Well said. Alarm bells went off everywhere when the AMA wanted to know who gave the "medical advice" to scrap all requirements because they dont agree with it. I suspect the same mob who gave scomo his advice - the dept of finance and treasury. -- Regards, Noel Butler This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate this message without the authors express written authority to do so. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noel.butler at ausics.net Sat Oct 15 11:27:41 2022 From: noel.butler at ausics.net (Noel Butler) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 10:27:41 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> Message-ID: On 15/10/2022 08:16, Paul Wayper via linux-aus wrote: > I'm still pissed off at the way LA handled it. That annoyance colours > my judgement of how the LA Council has handled the announcement of the > Everything Open conference. So I'm trying to put those feelings aside > and work with what the LA Council has decided to do. No LCA but e "open" Perhaps this extends back a few years, remembering how council tried to remove the the name "linux" and use foss or some crud resembling it, cant recall exactly what they wanted to move to and my care factor doesnt extend far enough for me to search my 5900 odd messages in this folder to find out, the same proponents of that move are now running the show... inch by inch ... remember how RedHat stealthly destroyed CentOS, that was planned and in the making for 7 years, inch by inch. First, Russell says there was nothing put forward, then there was, and clearly in his followup Russell knows there was, its like crime, 1 pieve of the puzzile means nothing, but but them all together and VOILA! ps IDGAFF if some of you think thats tinfoil hat stuff, and I sure as hell expect current and prior council members to go all Baghdag Bob and deny it. -- Regards, Noel Butler This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate this message without the authors express written authority to do so. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From info at petermoulding.com Sat Oct 15 11:55:45 2022 From: info at petermoulding.com (Info) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 11:55:45 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: True about Covid precautions. The hand washing and masks also reduced other infections. Beneficial to immune compromised people, people caring for young children, and the elderly plus all those people in regular contact with any of the above. Given my contact with several of the endangered groups, I would have to isolate from regular contacts during a face to face conference, for a few days after, and PCR test. If the state governments can be talked into helping conferences with onsite free PCR, I would have an entry test to protect attendees and an exit test to protect family. Video recordings for later viewing help some people but do not provide feedback to presenters. Realtime voice questions are mostly trash noise as few people maintain a sound booth for voice interaction. Realtime text questions through the right software work as the presenter can organise questions to fit the presentation and group similar questions. Charles Sturt Uni has a long history of online students, 60% online. Some of the good and bad examples of their online experience could be used to guide conferences toward an online option for attendees. What has the EO con proposed for remote access? Peter On 15/10/22 11:03, Andrew Pam via linux-aus wrote: > On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: >> As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of 2022. > > COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see a > fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. Sadly > many of us are still not able to attend any in-person conferences. The > premature decrease in protections and reporting is revealing who our > society doesn't value. > > Regards, > Andrew From steven.ellis at gmail.com Sat Oct 15 15:11:23 2022 From: steven.ellis at gmail.com (Steven Ellis) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 17:11:23 +1300 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> Message-ID: Hmmm.. Lots of tinfoil present in the post. Care to provide some proof to your accusations? Let us try to be positive about the fact there is a physical event happening. I've just got back from my physical event in 2 1/2 years (last one was linux.conf.au Gold Coast) and it was the most uplifting in a long time. Yes some people wore masks and some people wouldn't/couldn't attend, but for the near 200 attendees it was a very special time. Steven On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 1:28 PM Noel Butler via linux-aus < linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > On 15/10/2022 08:16, Paul Wayper via linux-aus wrote: > > I'm still pissed off at the way LA handled it. That annoyance colours > my judgement of how the LA Council has handled the announcement of the > Everything Open conference. So I'm trying to put those feelings aside and > work with what the LA Council has decided to do. > > > No LCA but e "open" > > Perhaps this extends back a few years, remembering how council tried to > remove the the name "linux" and use foss or some crud resembling it, cant > recall exactly what they wanted to move to and my care factor doesnt extend > far enough for me to search my 5900 odd messages in this folder to find > out, the same proponents of that move are now running the show... > > inch by inch ... remember how RedHat stealthly destroyed CentOS, that was > planned and in the making for 7 years, inch by inch. > > First, Russell says there was nothing put forward, then there was, and > clearly in his followup Russell knows there was, its like crime, 1 pieve of > the puzzile means nothing, but but them all together and VOILA! > > ps > > IDGAFF if some of you think thats tinfoil hat stuff, and I sure as hell > expect current and prior council members to go all Baghdag Bob and deny it. > > -- > > Regards, > Noel Butler > > This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged > information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to > copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate this > message without the authors express written authority to do so. If you > are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all > copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidentiality, > copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the > mistaken delivery of this message. > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steven.ellis at gmail.com Sat Oct 15 15:15:33 2022 From: steven.ellis at gmail.com (Steven Ellis) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 17:15:33 +1300 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> Message-ID: And Noel - why are you blacklisting direct responses? 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [2607:f8b0:4864:20::229] blocked using bl.zonecheck.org; Blocked - SpamTrap, see https://dnsbl.zonecheck.org/#traps On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 5:11 PM Steven Ellis wrote: > Hmmm.. Lots of tinfoil present in the post. Care to provide some proof to > your accusations? > > Let us try to be positive about the fact there is a physical event > happening. > > I've just got back from my physical event in 2 1/2 years (last one was > linux.conf.au Gold Coast) and it was the most uplifting in a long time. > Yes some people wore masks and some people wouldn't/couldn't attend, but > for the near 200 attendees it was a very special time. > > Steven > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 1:28 PM Noel Butler via linux-aus < > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > >> On 15/10/2022 08:16, Paul Wayper via linux-aus wrote: >> >> I'm still pissed off at the way LA handled it. That annoyance colours >> my judgement of how the LA Council has handled the announcement of the >> Everything Open conference. So I'm trying to put those feelings aside and >> work with what the LA Council has decided to do. >> >> >> No LCA but e "open" >> >> Perhaps this extends back a few years, remembering how council tried to >> remove the the name "linux" and use foss or some crud resembling it, cant >> recall exactly what they wanted to move to and my care factor doesnt extend >> far enough for me to search my 5900 odd messages in this folder to find >> out, the same proponents of that move are now running the show... >> >> inch by inch ... remember how RedHat stealthly destroyed CentOS, that >> was planned and in the making for 7 years, inch by inch. >> >> First, Russell says there was nothing put forward, then there was, and >> clearly in his followup Russell knows there was, its like crime, 1 pieve of >> the puzzile means nothing, but but them all together and VOILA! >> >> ps >> >> IDGAFF if some of you think thats tinfoil hat stuff, and I sure as hell >> expect current and prior council members to go all Baghdag Bob and deny it. >> >> -- >> >> Regards, >> Noel Butler >> >> This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged >> information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to >> copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate this >> message without the authors express written authority to do so. If you >> are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all >> copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidentiality, >> copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the >> mistaken delivery of this message. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-aus mailing list >> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From linux at hughr.me Sat Oct 15 15:31:17 2022 From: linux at hughr.me (Hugh Rundle) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 15:31:17 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Everything Open Message-ID: <0d71d4c0-0fb7-49a2-8548-dc39a54f1dea@app.fastmail.com> I went to a conference at the MCEC in February and managed to get Covid during the sole 30 minute window when I was not wearing a mask, so I'm not sure whether I will attend EO in person, but I just wanted to say: I am really looking forward to the gnu conference concept. --- Hugh Rundle -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon at darkmere.gen.nz Sat Oct 15 15:34:18 2022 From: simon at darkmere.gen.nz (Simon Lyall) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 17:34:18 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <3f3daa13-0a4d-8ad0-97db-7e242a6f7c32@stuart.id.au> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <3f3daa13-0a4d-8ad0-97db-7e242a6f7c32@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: On Thu, 13 Oct 2022, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > The answer to that philosophical question is above my pay grade. But in a > practical sense, in this particular situation, I very much doubt more > openness would have helped. I can't recall what was officially said at LCA > 2022, but I'm sure by the closing most people knew there were no bids. The > seriousness of the situation was made plain at the AGM, and if nothing else, > the absence of the big reveal of where the next LCA would be was a bit of a > give away. One problem I see with LA is that what the people on the committee think is general knowledge is often not general knowledge. They are immersed in something while the rest of us see nothing about it for 6 months at a time. I would suspect you will find that a large percentage of the people on this list do not know that there were no bids[1] for Linux.conf.au 2023. Certainly up until around June I was expecting a LCA to be announced. I just assumed lack of announcement was due to the usual LA secrecy. I mean even after EO was announced it was very much "connect the dots" to tell us this was replacing LCA. [1] Apart for the one mentioned elsewhere on the list that was not accepted. -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.simonlyall.com/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar From im at steven.geek.nz Sat Oct 15 15:32:31 2022 From: im at steven.geek.nz (Steven Ellis) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 17:32:31 +1300 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> Message-ID: <6a61680a658beb68799a4aa3b6c9e418@webmail.stevencherie.net> So let me try a different address and see if I trigger your SpamTrap again. On 2022-10-15 17:15, Steven Ellis via linux-aus wrote: > And Noel - why are you blacklisting direct responses? > > 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [2607:f8b0:4864:20::229] blocked using bl.zonecheck.org [1]; Blocked - SpamTrap, see https://dnsbl.zonecheck.org/#traps > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 5:11 PM Steven Ellis wrote: > > Hmmm.. Lots of tinfoil present in the post. Care to provide some proof to your accusations? > > Let us try to be positive about the fact there is a physical event happening. > > I've just got back from my physical event in 2 1/2 years (last one was linux.conf.au [2] Gold Coast) and it was the most uplifting in a long time. Yes some people wore masks and some people wouldn't/couldn't attend, but for the near 200 attendees it was a very special time. > > Steven > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 1:28 PM Noel Butler via linux-aus wrote: > > On 15/10/2022 08:16, Paul Wayper via linux-aus wrote: > > I'm still pissed off at the way LA handled it. That annoyance colours my judgement of how the LA Council has handled the announcement of the Everything Open conference. So I'm trying to put those feelings aside and work with what the LA Council has decided to do. > > No LCA but e "open" > > Perhaps this extends back a few years, remembering how council tried to remove the the name "linux" and use foss or some crud resembling it, cant recall exactly what they wanted to move to and my care factor doesnt extend far enough for me to search my 5900 odd messages in this folder to find out, the same proponents of that move are now running the show... > > inch by inch ... remember how RedHat stealthly destroyed CentOS, that was planned and in the making for 7 years, inch by inch. > > First, Russell says there was nothing put forward, then there was, and clearly in his followup Russell knows there was, its like crime, 1 pieve of the puzzile means nothing, but but them all together and VOILA! > > ps > > IDGAFF if some of you think thats tinfoil hat stuff, and I sure as hell expect current and prior council members to go all Baghdag Bob and deny it. > > -- > Regards, > Noel Butler > > This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate this message without the authors express written authority to do so. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message. > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au _______________________________________________ linux-aus mailing list linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au Links: ------ [1] http://bl.zonecheck.org [2] http://linux.conf.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steven.ellis at gmail.com Sat Oct 15 15:37:54 2022 From: steven.ellis at gmail.com (Steven Ellis) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 17:37:54 +1300 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <3f3daa13-0a4d-8ad0-97db-7e242a6f7c32@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: At the end of LCA 2022 it was made clear there were no bids for 2023. On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 5:34 PM Simon Lyall via linux-aus < linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > On Thu, 13 Oct 2022, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > > The answer to that philosophical question is above my pay grade. But in > a > > practical sense, in this particular situation, I very much doubt more > > openness would have helped. I can't recall what was officially said at > LCA > > 2022, but I'm sure by the closing most people knew there were no bids. > The > > seriousness of the situation was made plain at the AGM, and if nothing > else, > > the absence of the big reveal of where the next LCA would be was a bit > of a > > give away. > > One problem I see with LA is that what the people on the committee think > is > general knowledge is often not general knowledge. They are immersed in > something while the rest of us see nothing about it for 6 months at a > time. > > I would suspect you will find that a large percentage of the people on > this list do not know that there were no bids[1] for Linux.conf.au 2023. > > Certainly up until around June I was expecting a LCA to be announced. I > just assumed lack of announcement was due to the usual LA secrecy. > > I mean even after EO was announced it was very much "connect the dots" to > tell us this was replacing LCA. > > [1] Apart for the one mentioned elsewhere on the list that was not > accepted. > > -- > Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.simonlyall.com/ > "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mibus at mibus.org Sat Oct 15 15:39:31 2022 From: mibus at mibus.org (Robert Mibus) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 15:39:31 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> Message-ID: On the topic of mail blocking... it says via bl.zonecheck.org, so you can check: $ host 2607:f8b0:4864:20::229 9.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.0.4.6.8.4.0.b.8.f.7.0.6.2.ip6.arpa domain name pointer mail-oi1-x229.google.com. (DNS the other way matches, FTR, so this PTR record is accurate) $ host 9.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.0.4.6.8.4.0.b.8.f.7.0.6.2.bl.zonecheck.org 9.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.0.4.6.8.4.0.b.8.f.7.0.6.2.bl.zonecheck.org has address 127.0.0.10 127.0.0.10 is indeed the "spamtrap" address at https://dnsbl.zonecheck.org/#traps > spamtrap.bl.zonecheck.org - Our spamtrap honeypot. This will list IP's who send to our > honeypot trap addresses, these are special addresses that have never been, nor ever will > be, used anywhere, they are discreet hidden addresses designed to "trap" address > harvesters. > Usage of this list is considered to be safe, very low risk > Listing Duration: long. > Code: 127.0.0.10 Poking around other values near the address, I'd say the /64 is on the blocklist. Blocking outbound IPs fromused by Gmail is not likely a good SNR for a filter; hopefully Noel sees this via the list and can remove the relevant entry/entries. -- Robert Mibus From steven.ellis at gmail.com Sat Oct 15 15:44:53 2022 From: steven.ellis at gmail.com (Steven Ellis) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 17:44:53 +1300 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> Message-ID: Robert - thanks for clarifying. Sadly the information at https://dnsbl.zonecheck.org doesn't provide any details on how to report issues or even troubleshoot the problem. Steven On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 5:39 PM Robert Mibus wrote: > On the topic of mail blocking... it says via bl.zonecheck.org, so you can > check: > > $ host 2607:f8b0:4864:20::229 > 9.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.0.4.6.8.4.0.b.8.f.7.0.6.2.ip6.arpa > domain name pointer mail-oi1-x229.google.com. > > (DNS the other way matches, FTR, so this PTR record is accurate) > > $ host > 9.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.0.4.6.8.4.0.b.8.f.7.0.6.2.bl.zonecheck.org > > 9.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.0.4.6.8.4.0.b.8.f.7.0.6.2.bl.zonecheck.org > has address 127.0.0.10 > > 127.0.0.10 is indeed the "spamtrap" address at > https://dnsbl.zonecheck.org/#traps > > > spamtrap.bl.zonecheck.org - Our spamtrap honeypot. This will list IP's > who send to our > > honeypot trap addresses, these are special addresses that have never > been, nor ever will > > be, used anywhere, they are discreet hidden addresses designed to "trap" > address > > harvesters. > > Usage of this list is considered to be safe, very low risk > > Listing Duration: long. > > Code: 127.0.0.10 > > Poking around other values near the address, I'd say the /64 is on the > blocklist. > > Blocking outbound IPs fromused by Gmail is not likely a good SNR for a > filter; hopefully Noel sees this via the list and can remove the > relevant entry/entries. > -- > Robert Mibus > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon at darkmere.gen.nz Sat Oct 15 16:18:34 2022 From: simon at darkmere.gen.nz (Simon Lyall) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 18:18:34 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <3f3daa13-0a4d-8ad0-97db-7e242a6f7c32@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: <4f9136a7-6c7a-f4e7-8a44-e6249c96695d@darkmere.gen.nz> On Sat, 15 Oct 2022, Steven Ellis via linux-aus wrote: > At the end of LCA 2022 it was made clear there were no bids for 2023. I don't actually remember that. But certainly there was no followup announcement to any of the mailing lists (that I can find). Like I said I'm sure there were a bunch of people who were thinking about this and discussing it constantly. But mostly of us had no idea what was going on or if there was even a problem. -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.simonlyall.com/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar From wil at zeropointdevelopment.com Sat Oct 15 16:51:04 2022 From: wil at zeropointdevelopment.com (Wil Brown) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 16:51:04 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Everything Open In-Reply-To: <0d71d4c0-0fb7-49a2-8548-dc39a54f1dea@app.fastmail.com> References: <0d71d4c0-0fb7-49a2-8548-dc39a54f1dea@app.fastmail.com> Message-ID: Hi Hugh We are aware Covid is still amongst us and will put in recommendations and as much safety as possible but it is still up to each individual to assess the risk of attending an in-person event. Thank you for your welcomed positive comments about the new conference. Regards, Wil. On Sat, 15 Oct 2022, 15:32 Hugh Rundle via linux-aus, < linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > I went to a conference at the MCEC in February and managed to get Covid > during the sole 30 minute window when I was not wearing a mask, so I'm not > sure whether I will attend EO in person, but I just wanted to say: > > I am really looking forward to the gnu conference concept. > > --- > Hugh Rundle > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joel at addison.net.au Sat Oct 15 16:57:24 2022 From: joel at addison.net.au (Joel Addison) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 15:57:24 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: <676032CE-EC30-4721-B5A0-172326D4E18F@addison.net.au> Hi Peter, Our intent is to provide an online stream of the conference, along with facilities to interact with others at the conference, similar to the platform we used for the online conferences. We have used online question mechanisms a couple of times now, both online and at past in person events, and we are looking to do similar this time. We are still working through all of the logistics of this, and will have more to say closer to ticket sales opening. Kind regards, Joel > On 15 Oct 2022, at 10:55, Info via linux-aus wrote: > > True about Covid precautions. The hand washing and masks also reduced other infections. Beneficial to immune compromised people, people caring for young children, and the elderly plus all those people in regular contact with any of the above. > > Given my contact with several of the endangered groups, I would have to isolate from regular contacts during a face to face conference, for a few days after, and PCR test. > > If the state governments can be talked into helping conferences with onsite free PCR, I would have an entry test to protect attendees and an exit test to protect family. > > Video recordings for later viewing help some people but do not provide feedback to presenters. Realtime voice questions are mostly trash noise as few people maintain a sound booth for voice interaction. Realtime text questions through the right software work as the presenter can organise questions to fit the presentation and group similar questions. > > Charles Sturt Uni has a long history of online students, 60% online. Some of the good and bad examples of their online experience could be used to guide conferences toward an online option for attendees. > > What has the EO con proposed for remote access? > > Peter > > On 15/10/22 11:03, Andrew Pam via linux-aus wrote: >> On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: >>> As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of 2022. >> COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see a >> fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. Sadly >> many of us are still not able to attend any in-person conferences. The >> premature decrease in protections and reporting is revealing who our >> society doesn't value. >> Regards, >> Andrew > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au From matroxmike at icloud.com Sat Oct 15 17:21:29 2022 From: matroxmike at icloud.com (Michael) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 17:21:29 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <676032CE-EC30-4721-B5A0-172326D4E18F@addison.net.au> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> <676032CE-EC30-4721-B5A0-172326D4E18F@addison.net.au> Message-ID: <3b22c35e-eeaa-b607-9387-13b868ace9b0@icloud.com> So where is it going to be? On 15/10/22 16:57, Joel Addison via linux-aus wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Our intent is to provide an online stream of the conference, along with facilities to interact with others at the conference, similar to the platform we used for the online conferences. We have used online question mechanisms a couple of times now, both online and at past in person events, and we are looking to do similar this time. We are still working through all of the logistics of this, and will have more to say closer to ticket sales opening. > > Kind regards, > Joel > >> On 15 Oct 2022, at 10:55, Info via linux-aus wrote: >> >> True about Covid precautions. The hand washing and masks also reduced other infections. Beneficial to immune compromised people, people caring for young children, and the elderly plus all those people in regular contact with any of the above. >> >> Given my contact with several of the endangered groups, I would have to isolate from regular contacts during a face to face conference, for a few days after, and PCR test. >> >> If the state governments can be talked into helping conferences with onsite free PCR, I would have an entry test to protect attendees and an exit test to protect family. >> >> Video recordings for later viewing help some people but do not provide feedback to presenters. Realtime voice questions are mostly trash noise as few people maintain a sound booth for voice interaction. Realtime text questions through the right software work as the presenter can organise questions to fit the presentation and group similar questions. >> >> Charles Sturt Uni has a long history of online students, 60% online. Some of the good and bad examples of their online experience could be used to guide conferences toward an online option for attendees. >> >> What has the EO con proposed for remote access? >> >> Peter >> >> On 15/10/22 11:03, Andrew Pam via linux-aus wrote: >>> On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: >>>> As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of 2022. >>> COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see a >>> fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. Sadly >>> many of us are still not able to attend any in-person conferences. The >>> premature decrease in protections and reporting is revealing who our >>> society doesn't value. >>> Regards, >>> Andrew >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-aus mailing list >> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au From joel at addison.net.au Sat Oct 15 17:31:47 2022 From: joel at addison.net.au (Joel Addison) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 16:31:47 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <3b22c35e-eeaa-b607-9387-13b868ace9b0@icloud.com> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> <676032CE-EC30-4721-B5A0-172326D4E18F@addison.net.au> <3b22c35e-eeaa-b607-9387-13b868ace9b0@icloud.com> Message-ID: Everything Open is being held at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre from March 14-16 2023. Note that Monday 13 March is a public holiday in Naarm, and we would like to encourage everyone to explore Melbourne, catch up with friends and see the city, prior to attending the conference. My response below is regarding remote access options for those who do not wish to attend in person, something we recognise will apply to several members of our community. Joel > On 15 Oct 2022, at 16:21, Michael via linux-aus wrote: > > So where is it going to be? > > On 15/10/22 16:57, Joel Addison via linux-aus wrote: >> Hi Peter, >> >> Our intent is to provide an online stream of the conference, along with facilities to interact with others at the conference, similar to the platform we used for the online conferences. We have used online question mechanisms a couple of times now, both online and at past in person events, and we are looking to do similar this time. We are still working through all of the logistics of this, and will have more to say closer to ticket sales opening. >> >> Kind regards, >> Joel >> >>> On 15 Oct 2022, at 10:55, Info via linux-aus wrote: >>> >>> True about Covid precautions. The hand washing and masks also reduced other infections. Beneficial to immune compromised people, people caring for young children, and the elderly plus all those people in regular contact with any of the above. >>> >>> Given my contact with several of the endangered groups, I would have to isolate from regular contacts during a face to face conference, for a few days after, and PCR test. >>> >>> If the state governments can be talked into helping conferences with onsite free PCR, I would have an entry test to protect attendees and an exit test to protect family. >>> >>> Video recordings for later viewing help some people but do not provide feedback to presenters. Realtime voice questions are mostly trash noise as few people maintain a sound booth for voice interaction. Realtime text questions through the right software work as the presenter can organise questions to fit the presentation and group similar questions. >>> >>> Charles Sturt Uni has a long history of online students, 60% online. Some of the good and bad examples of their online experience could be used to guide conferences toward an online option for attendees. >>> >>> What has the EO con proposed for remote access? >>> >>> Peter >>> >>> On 15/10/22 11:03, Andrew Pam via linux-aus wrote: >>>> On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: >>>>> As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of 2022. >>>> COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see a >>>> fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. Sadly >>>> many of us are still not able to attend any in-person conferences. The >>>> premature decrease in protections and reporting is revealing who our >>>> society doesn't value. >>>> Regards, >>>> Andrew >>> _______________________________________________ >>> linux-aus mailing list >>> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >>> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus >>> >>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >>> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-aus mailing list >> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au From noel.butler at ausics.net Sat Oct 15 19:02:37 2022 From: noel.butler at ausics.net (Noel Butler) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 18:02:37 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <6a61680a658beb68799a4aa3b6c9e418@webmail.stevencherie.net> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <6a61680a658beb68799a4aa3b6c9e418@webmail.stevencherie.net> Message-ID: <1a2a3a5f3803734cb7800a83c59992d1@ausics.net> On 15/10/2022 14:32, Steven Ellis wrote: > So let me try a different address and see if I trigger your SpamTrap > again. you didn't trigger it, somebody else did Learn about mail defence systems, and spam traps, then ask the question again, actually, if you learn about mail defence systems and spam traps you wont have to ask newbie questions like that > On 2022-10-15 17:15, Steven Ellis via linux-aus wrote: > >> And Noel - why are you blacklisting direct responses? Learn about mail systems then ask the question again, actually, if you learn about mail systems you wont have to ask newbie questions like that Secondly, why are you direct responding, mailing list replies should go to mailing list, thats the whole idea, perhaps you need to learn about them too. > 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [2607:f8b0:4864:20::229] > blocked using bl.zonecheck.org [1]; Blocked - SpamTrap, see > https://dnsbl.zonecheck.org/#traps > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 5:11 PM Steven Ellis > wrote: > > Hmmm.. Lots of tinfoil present in the post. Care to provide some proof > to your accusations? It's called track history, as per my example we've seen it before. -- Regards, Noel Butler This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate this message without the authors express written authority to do so. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message. Links: ------ [1] http://bl.zonecheck.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From russell at coker.com.au Sat Oct 15 20:39:00 2022 From: russell at coker.com.au (Russell Coker) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 20:39:00 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] COVID19 deaths In-Reply-To: References: <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: <3601841.BddDVKsqQX@xev> Currently the Covid19 death toll for Australia is higher than any time before the start of this year. This year has been far worse than previous years for Covid19 deaths largely because people are getting lazy about protections. I think that Linux Australia should have a policy of discouraging any in- person meetings at this time and for the forseeable future. http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2020-March/thread.html I first raised this issue more than 2 years ago. Since then it has become obvious that it's not a scam and not like the yearly flu. We should aim for far more than the minimum required of us by Australian law in terms of protecting our community. On Saturday, 15 October 2022 11:03:49 AEDT Andrew Pam via linux-aus wrote: > On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > > As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of 2022. > > COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see a > fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. Sadly > many of us are still not able to attend any in-person conferences. The > premature decrease in protections and reporting is revealing who our > society doesn't value. > > Regards, > Andrew -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ From marcus at herstik.com Sat Oct 15 20:44:13 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 19:44:13 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9642E417-DC24-4BFF-A548-9F92FD6D3AD9@herstik.com> > On 15 Oct 2022, at 10:03 am, Andrew Pam wrote: > ?On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: >> As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of 2022. > > COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see a fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. Sadly many of us are still not able to attend any in-person conferences. The premature decrease in protections and reporting is revealing who our society doesn't value. > > Regards, > Andrew > -- Please don?t mention things like ?premature decrease in protections and reporting?, nor speculate on the health of the general population. This is an opinion and not one that may be held by all member of the constituency, and it will likely only sow further discord. Regarding the conference situation, I too am one that thinks there may be a change in the direction of LA, and I am a little perturbed by how it happened. Funnily enough it sort of reminds me of the way the ACS went a short time ago. I?m sure we all know how well that turned out. I wonder if the organisation should be called ?Open Source Australia? instead - which would have to be put to a formal vote, require change of name of incorporation etc. If this is truly how the organisation wants to go then it should do it properly rather than via stealth. Or maybe I?m just reading too much into it? Regards, Marcus Herstik M: 0405-569-466 A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From a.nielsen at shikadi.net Sat Oct 15 21:40:07 2022 From: a.nielsen at shikadi.net (Adam Nielsen) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 20:40:07 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <9642E417-DC24-4BFF-A548-9F92FD6D3AD9@herstik.com> References: <9642E417-DC24-4BFF-A548-9F92FD6D3AD9@herstik.com> Message-ID: <20221015204007.1cffbec4@vorticon.teln.shikadi.net> > I wonder if the organisation should be called ?Open Source Australia? > instead - which would have to be put to a formal vote, require change > of name of incorporation etc. If this is truly how the organisation > wants to go then it should do it properly rather than via stealth. Or > maybe I?m just reading too much into it? FYI this was discussed back in 2017: http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2017-December/thread.html It ended up in a formal vote, and the majority of the membership voted against a name change. I think a lot of Linux users liked the fact that the Linux name was so strongly associated with supporting open source (having so many open source conferences funded by an organisation so strongly tied to Linux) so they wanted to keep the name and all the goodwill it brought to Linux. Cheers, Adam. From steven.ellis at gmail.com Sat Oct 15 21:48:39 2022 From: steven.ellis at gmail.com (Steven Ellis) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 23:48:39 +1300 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <1a2a3a5f3803734cb7800a83c59992d1@ausics.net> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <6a61680a658beb68799a4aa3b6c9e418@webmail.stevencherie.net> <1a2a3a5f3803734cb7800a83c59992d1@ausics.net> Message-ID: Reply is set to sender and not to list Reply All includes your email address. I've debugged email issues in the past but not in depth for a couple of years, so be careful about your assumptions. Following the trail leads me to a site which mentions the ability to request removal, but no ability to do that - very odd. Perhaps you can elaborate on "Track history" as I'm not aware of that term - please excuse my ignorance. But on the other hand there are a number of statements you've made that are factually incorrect and I'd like you to retract them., Steven On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 9:03 PM Noel Butler via linux-aus < linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > On 15/10/2022 14:32, Steven Ellis wrote: > > So let me try a different address and see if I trigger your SpamTrap again. > > > you didn't trigger it, somebody else did > > Learn about mail defence systems, and spam traps, then ask the question > again, actually, if you learn about mail defence systems and spam traps > you wont have to ask newbie questions like that > > > On 2022-10-15 17:15, Steven Ellis via linux-aus wrote: > > And Noel - why are you blacklisting direct responses? > > > > > Learn about mail systems then ask the question again, actually, if you > learn about mail systems you wont have to ask newbie questions like that > > Secondly, why are you direct responding, mailing list replies should go to > mailing list, thats the whole idea, perhaps you need to learn about them > too. > > > > > > > 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [2607:f8b0:4864:20::229] > blocked using bl.zonecheck.org; Blocked - SpamTrap, see > https://dnsbl.zonecheck.org/#traps > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 5:11 PM Steven Ellis > wrote: > > Hmmm.. Lots of tinfoil present in the post. Care to provide some proof to > your accusations? > > > It's called track history, as per my example we've seen it before. > > > -- > > Regards, > Noel Butler > > This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged > information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to > copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate this > message without the authors express written authority to do so. If you > are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all > copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidentiality, > copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the > mistaken delivery of this message. > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steven.ellis at gmail.com Sat Oct 15 21:51:31 2022 From: steven.ellis at gmail.com (Steven Ellis) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 23:51:31 +1300 Subject: [Linux-aus] COVID19 deaths In-Reply-To: <3601841.BddDVKsqQX@xev> References: <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> <3601841.BddDVKsqQX@xev> Message-ID: Can you please provide details of this. Here in NZ our COVID deaths are very low and currently decreasing so I'd be interested to see where the OZ numbers are coming from. On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 10:39 PM Russell Coker via linux-aus < linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > Currently the Covid19 death toll for Australia is higher than any time > before > the start of this year. This year has been far worse than previous years > for > Covid19 deaths largely because people are getting lazy about protections. > > I think that Linux Australia should have a policy of discouraging any in- > person meetings at this time and for the forseeable future. > > http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2020-March/thread.html > > I first raised this issue more than 2 years ago. Since then it has become > obvious that it's not a scam and not like the yearly flu. > > We should aim for far more than the minimum required of us by Australian > law > in terms of protecting our community. > > On Saturday, 15 October 2022 11:03:49 AEDT Andrew Pam via linux-aus wrote: > > On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > > > As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of 2022. > > > > COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see a > > fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. Sadly > > many of us are still not able to attend any in-person conferences. The > > premature decrease in protections and reporting is revealing who our > > society doesn't value. > > > > Regards, > > Andrew > > > -- > My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ > My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steven.ellis at gmail.com Sat Oct 15 21:54:50 2022 From: steven.ellis at gmail.com (Steven Ellis) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 23:54:50 +1300 Subject: [Linux-aus] COVID19 deaths In-Reply-To: References: <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> <3601841.BddDVKsqQX@xev> Message-ID: Hi Russel This is the tracker I'm using to compare OZ vs NZ etc. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/australia/ Do you have different data you can share? On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 11:51 PM Steven Ellis wrote: > Can you please provide details of this. Here in NZ our COVID deaths are > very low and currently decreasing so I'd be interested to see where the OZ > numbers are coming from. > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 10:39 PM Russell Coker via linux-aus < > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > >> Currently the Covid19 death toll for Australia is higher than any time >> before >> the start of this year. This year has been far worse than previous years >> for >> Covid19 deaths largely because people are getting lazy about protections. >> >> I think that Linux Australia should have a policy of discouraging any in- >> person meetings at this time and for the forseeable future. >> >> http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2020-March/thread.html >> >> I first raised this issue more than 2 years ago. Since then it has >> become >> obvious that it's not a scam and not like the yearly flu. >> >> We should aim for far more than the minimum required of us by Australian >> law >> in terms of protecting our community. >> >> On Saturday, 15 October 2022 11:03:49 AEDT Andrew Pam via linux-aus wrote: >> > On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: >> > > As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of >> 2022. >> > >> > COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see a >> > fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. Sadly >> > many of us are still not able to attend any in-person conferences. The >> > premature decrease in protections and reporting is revealing who our >> > society doesn't value. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Andrew >> >> >> -- >> My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ >> My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-aus mailing list >> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marcus at herstik.com Sat Oct 15 22:43:02 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 21:43:02 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] COVID19 deaths In-Reply-To: <3601841.BddDVKsqQX@xev> References: <3601841.BddDVKsqQX@xev> Message-ID: > On 15 Oct 2022, at 7:39 pm, Russell Coker wrote: > > I think that Linux Australia should have a policy of discouraging any in- > person meetings at this time and for the forseeable future. > Seems that?s a pretty big position to take and one I will heartily disagree with. It also seems to me to indicate a slight bias towards a particular outcome and could be seen to influence votes rather than take issues on their merit. I?m sorry you feel that way but I don?t think it?s very reasonable to force everyone else to do what you want, nor is it equitable. You don?t have to go but don?t force others not to if they choose differently. I?m not going to get into Covid figures etc as this is not what I?m actually having issues with. Rather I have issue with the fact the LA council may be moving in a direction that has been voted on and found to not be the way the members want to go. (Which I do recall but the irony seemed to be lost on some). From russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au Sat Oct 15 22:53:18 2022 From: russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au (Russell Stuart) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 21:53:18 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] COVID19 deaths In-Reply-To: References: <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> <3601841.BddDVKsqQX@xev> Message-ID: On 15/10/22 20:54, Steven Ellis via linux-aus wrote: > https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/australia/ > > > Do you have different data you can share? I know I'm the wrong Russell, but I use this one: http://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=countries-normalized&highlight=Australia&show=who-wpro&y=both&scale=linear&data=deaths-daily-7&data-source=jhu&xaxis=right#countries-normalized If you don't like the graphic you can try changing sources (spoiler, they all tell similar stories): - Johns Hopkins University - Oxford University (Our World in Data) - The Atlantic (COVID Tracking Project) From marcus at herstik.com Sat Oct 15 23:07:49 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 22:07:49 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] COVID19 deaths In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6917D5E3-C5F0-4905-842C-994F07681FAD@herstik.com> Ok Steven, I?ll bite. These are official Gov stats with links. Total stats (seems to me to either have a few holes or we had some great months with 0 deaths) https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/covid-19-mortality-australia-deaths-registered-until-31-july-2022#deaths-due-to-covid-19-year-and-month-of-occurrence Age and sex breakdown (from same page) https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/covid-19-mortality-australia-deaths-registered-until-31-july-2022#deaths-due-to-covid-19-age-and-sex Associated causes (same page) https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/covid-19-mortality-australia-deaths-registered-until-31-july-2022#deaths-due-to-covid-19-age-and-sex Latest for this year (different page). https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/causes-death/provisional-mortality-statistics/jan-jun-2022 Clearly shows the number has risen significantly this year with a massive spike in Jan this year - Xmas seemed to be a mass spread event. Quite erratic for the rest of this year but again, much higher than previous. Likely due to lack of interest in the population and the relaxing of rules everywhere. Funnily enough state with longest lockdowns has highest proportion of deaths due to Covid. Go figure. https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/covid-19-mortality-australia-deaths-registered-until-31-july-2022#deaths-due-to-covid-19-state-of-registration FYI - Of the 407,221 death registrations received by the ABS (both doctor and coroner certified) in Australia during the pandemic period, 2.3% are of people who have died with or from COVID-19. Let me state I am neither for or against Covid, but instead just think people should be armed with facts and allowed to make their own mind up. I am however against restrictions on freedom, which I believe is consistent with this organisations stated goals. Make of this what you will. Regards, Marcus Herstik > On 15 Oct 2022, at 8:51 pm, Steven Ellis wrote: > > ? > Can you please provide details of this. Here in NZ our COVID deaths are very low and currently decreasing so I'd be interested to see where the OZ numbers are coming from. > >> On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 10:39 PM Russell Coker via linux-aus wrote: >> Currently the Covid19 death toll for Australia is higher than any time before >> the start of this year. This year has been far worse than previous years for >> Covid19 deaths largely because people are getting lazy about protections. >> >> I think that Linux Australia should have a policy of discouraging any in- >> person meetings at this time and for the forseeable future. >> >> http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2020-March/thread.html >> >> I first raised this issue more than 2 years ago. Since then it has become >> obvious that it's not a scam and not like the yearly flu. >> >> We should aim for far more than the minimum required of us by Australian law >> in terms of protecting our community. >> >> On Saturday, 15 October 2022 11:03:49 AEDT Andrew Pam via linux-aus wrote: >> > On 15/10/22 10:33, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: >> > > As it happened, COVID was very much still a thing at the start of 2022. >> > >> > COVID is still very much a thing now, and in fact we are likely to see a >> > fresh wave of the latest variants that are even more infectious. Sadly >> > many of us are still not able to attend any in-person conferences. The >> > premature decrease in protections and reporting is revealing who our >> > society doesn't value. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Andrew >> >> >> -- >> My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ >> My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-aus mailing list >> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marcus at herstik.com Sat Oct 15 23:11:01 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 22:11:01 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <20221015204007.1cffbec4@vorticon.teln.shikadi.net> References: <20221015204007.1cffbec4@vorticon.teln.shikadi.net> Message-ID: <1315F8A7-6317-4030-BCE9-E97320115662@herstik.com> Hi Adam, I was alluding to this fact. One wonders if the council remember? Regards, Marcus Herstik > On 15 Oct 2022, at 8:40 pm, Adam Nielsen wrote: > > ? >> >> I wonder if the organisation should be called ?Open Source Australia? >> instead - which would have to be put to a formal vote, require change >> of name of incorporation etc. If this is truly how the organisation >> wants to go then it should do it properly rather than via stealth. Or >> maybe I?m just reading too much into it? > > FYI this was discussed back in 2017: > > http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2017-December/thread.html > > It ended up in a formal vote, and the majority of the membership voted > against a name change. > > I think a lot of Linux users liked the fact that the Linux name was so > strongly associated with supporting open source (having so many open > source conferences funded by an organisation so strongly tied to Linux) > so they wanted to keep the name and all the goodwill it brought to > Linux. > > Cheers, > Adam. > From joel at addison.net.au Sat Oct 15 23:26:28 2022 From: joel at addison.net.au (Joel Addison) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 22:26:28 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Recent mailing list discussions Message-ID: <822B5518-75A3-40B4-B3B2-D1C1A2226487@addison.net.au> Hello everyone, It is time to draw a line under the threads from the past couple of days on this mailing list and cease discussion on these topics. I understand there are many views on many topics within the community. Unfortunately this has moved to a point where this no longer aligns with the conduct we expect of our community. We have received multiple complaints about the conduct on this thread. A reminder that our mailing list comes under our communications policy, which is available here: https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/blob/master/communications-policy.md Regards, Joel Addison President Linux Australia -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From russell at coker.com.au Sat Oct 15 23:45:27 2022 From: russell at coker.com.au (Russell Coker) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 23:45:27 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] COVID19 deaths In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4164030.AJdgDx1Vlc@xev> On Saturday, 15 October 2022 21:54:50 AEDT Steven Ellis via linux-aus wrote: > This is the tracker I'm using to compare OZ vs NZ etc. > > https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/australia/ > > Do you have different data you can share? The graph you cited shows that the last few weeks in Australia have had similar numbers of deaths to the previous peaks in Sep 2021 and Aug 2020. The numbers for Australia at the moment look small when compared to the highs between Feb and Sep this year, but are still greater than the previous years. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ From russell at coker.com.au Sat Oct 15 23:49:37 2022 From: russell at coker.com.au (Russell Coker) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 23:49:37 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] COVID19 deaths In-Reply-To: References: <3601841.BddDVKsqQX@xev> Message-ID: <7484908.4vTCxPXJkl@xev> On Saturday, 15 October 2022 22:43:02 AEDT Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: > > On 15 Oct 2022, at 7:39 pm, Russell Coker wrote: > > > > I think that Linux Australia should have a policy of discouraging any in- > > person meetings at this time and for the forseeable future. > > Seems that?s a pretty big position to take and one I will heartily disagree > with. It also seems to me to indicate a slight bias towards a particular > outcome and could be seen to influence votes rather than take issues on > their merit. My bias is towards keeping people alive. The vaccines decrease the mortality and decrease the rate of spread but don't prevent it. It was after the vaccines became available that we had the highest death rates. > I?m sorry you feel that way but I don?t think it?s very reasonable to force > everyone else to do what you want, nor is it equitable. You don?t have to > go but don?t force others not to if they choose differently. How is it equitable to have a conference that excludes older people, people with immune problems, and other at risk groups? > Rather I have issue with the fact the LA council may be moving in a > direction that has been voted on and found to not be the way the members > want to go. (Which I do recall but the irony seemed to be lost on some). There has not been a vote on how far we should go to reduce the death toll in the community. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ From nikolai at lusan.id.au Sun Oct 16 00:48:21 2022 From: nikolai at lusan.id.au (Nikolai Lusan) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 23:48:21 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] COVID19 deaths In-Reply-To: References: <3601841.BddDVKsqQX@xev> Message-ID: On 15/10/22 21:43, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: >> On 15 Oct 2022, at 7:39 pm, Russell Coker wrote: >> >> I think that Linux Australia should have a policy of discouraging any in- >> person meetings at this time and for the forseeable future. >> > I?m sorry you feel that way but I don?t think it?s very reasonable to force everyone else to do what you want, nor is it equitable. But it is reasonable for you to put other peoples lives at risk by not taking precautions that could prevent you from spreading a potentially lethal virus to others? You could be positive and asymptomatic, or simply think your symptoms have past but still be contagious. If you were positive with measles, or rubella would you go out in public at put other people (and potentially unborn babies) at risk? Because you are encouraging a behaviour that puts large portions of the population at risk, including the elderly, and those who are immune compromised (possibly because of medication, possibly because of other medical situations). > I?m not going to get into Covid figures etc as this is not what I?m actually having issues with. Lets face it, on average there are about 500 deaths Australia wide each year from the flu. The current death rates for COVID greatly outstrip that. Given that there are simple precautions (like wearing a mask) that can greatly decrease the risks of spreading such a deadly virus not taking those precautions is irresponsible, and makes you a public health liability. I am fully vaccinated, but still at a higher risk factor than the general public because: a) I have had a bone marrow transplant, and there is clinical evidence that immune systems don't recover fully after those. b) I am on common medication used to treat everything from asthma to arthritis and any number of other ailments. The level my dosage means that I am immune compromised, and there are questions as to the effectiveness the vaccinations have. So don't be a moron and put other peoples lives at risk. Taking precautions like mask wearing, or teleconferenced meetings still makes sense at this juncture of the pandemic/endemic situation. -- Nikolai Lusan -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: OpenPGP_0xE19683455D952FA4.asc Type: application/pgp-keys Size: 8200 bytes Desc: OpenPGP public key URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: OpenPGP_signature Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 840 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From steven.ellis at gmail.com Sun Oct 16 09:03:40 2022 From: steven.ellis at gmail.com (Steven Ellis) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 11:03:40 +1300 Subject: [Linux-aus] COVID19 deaths In-Reply-To: <4164030.AJdgDx1Vlc@xev> References: <4164030.AJdgDx1Vlc@xev> Message-ID: Hi Russell This doesn't match with your original statement, hence my query "Currently the Covid19 death toll for Australia is higher than any time before the start of this year." On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 1:45 AM Russell Coker wrote: > On Saturday, 15 October 2022 21:54:50 AEDT Steven Ellis via linux-aus > wrote: > > This is the tracker I'm using to compare OZ vs NZ etc. > > > > https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/australia/ > > > > Do you have different data you can share? > > The graph you cited shows that the last few weeks in Australia have had > similar numbers of deaths to the previous peaks in Sep 2021 and Aug 2020. > > The numbers for Australia at the moment look small when compared to the > highs > between Feb and Sep this year, but are still greater than the previous > years. > > -- > My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ > My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marcus at herstik.com Sun Oct 16 09:05:16 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 08:05:16 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Recent mailing list discussions In-Reply-To: <822B5518-75A3-40B4-B3B2-D1C1A2226487@addison.net.au> References: <822B5518-75A3-40B4-B3B2-D1C1A2226487@addison.net.au> Message-ID: <536AFAC4-AB20-4EE1-9498-81BC6C913D50@herstik.com> I agree. I think there are bigger issues that need to be considered. To this I will be putting myself forward for council. Regards, Marcus Herstik M: 0405-569-466 A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 > On 15 Oct 2022, at 10:26 pm, Joel Addison wrote: > > ? > Hello everyone, > > It is time to draw a line under the threads from the past couple of days on this mailing list and cease discussion on these topics. > > I understand there are many views on many topics within the community. Unfortunately this has moved to a point where this no longer aligns with the conduct we expect of our community. We have received multiple complaints about the conduct on this thread. > > A reminder that our mailing list comes under our communications policy, which is available here: https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/blob/master/communications-policy.md > > Regards, > Joel Addison > > President > Linux Australia > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marcus at herstik.com Sun Oct 16 09:14:21 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 08:14:21 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Logins not working Message-ID: <9941C814-2EB7-4842-A27B-BF0C61CF17D2@herstik.com> Hi, It appears the website logins are not working. I have tried Firefox and DDG from my phone as well as FF, brave and chromium on my PoPOS. Can an admin please look at this. Regards, Marcus Herstik M: 0405-569-466 A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kathy at kathyreid.id.au Sun Oct 16 10:01:37 2022 From: kathy at kathyreid.id.au (Kathy Reid) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 10:01:37 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Logins not working In-Reply-To: <9941C814-2EB7-4842-A27B-BF0C61CF17D2@herstik.com> References: <9941C814-2EB7-4842-A27B-BF0C61CF17D2@herstik.com> Message-ID: <77118ff4-96c7-817a-6078-735677463054@kathyreid.id.au> I can replicate this behaviour, making the following assumptions: 1. Assuming the website is https://linux.org.au, I have tried logging in (with previously known good) credentials in FF and Chrome on Ubuntu 20.04 LTS (latest stable versions of each browser) 2. The website does nothing after clicking "Log In" and the button is greyed out. 3. The console error reads: Uncaught Error: Invalid site key or not loaded in api.js: 6LdNLrkZAAAAACT8PgzJcK7oGC5Usc7A_iOLjh90 ??? z https://www.gstatic.com/recaptcha/releases/vP4jQKq0YJFzU6e21-BGy3GP/recaptcha__en.js:143 ??? X https://www.gstatic.com/recaptcha/releases/vP4jQKq0YJFzU6e21-BGy3GP/recaptcha__en.js:289 ??? wfls_init_captcha https://linux.org.au/wp-content/plugins/wordfence/modules/login-security/js/login.1664898183.js?ver=1.0.11:101 recaptcha__en.js:143:214 I suspect this is to do with the Recaptcha credentials in WordPress, which is used for the front end of the website (I used to maintain the frontend of this website, along with a bunch of other stuff, back when I was on LA Council from around 2013-2018). I think the domain needs to be whitelisted with the Recaptcha credentials that have been used: https://wordpress.org/support/topic/unable-to-login-if-invalid-domain-for-site-key/ I'm not sure which account was used for the Recaptcha credentials, but at a guess it's in the key store used by Council (I am being deliberately vague for obvious reasons). (directed to Joel & Council - happy to help resolve this, you have my direct contact details) Kind regards, Kathy Reid On 16/10/22 09:14, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: > Hi, > It appears the website logins are not working. > I have tried Firefox and DDG from my phone as well as FF, brave and > chromium on my PoPOS. > Can an admin please look at this. > > Regards, > Marcus Herstik > > M: 0405-569-466 > A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jwoithe at just42.net Sun Oct 16 10:44:53 2022 From: jwoithe at just42.net (Jonathan Woithe) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 10:14:53 +1030 Subject: [Linux-aus] No intent to change name of "Linux Australia" Message-ID: Hi everyone It has been suggested in recent threads on this list that there were moves afoot to change the name of "Linux Australia". As a current member of the Linux Australia Council I would like to make it clear that the current council has no desire, intent or plan to revisit this. The community discussed and voted on a change of name in late 2017, and the definitive result was that the membership did not wish to alter the name. Hypothetically, if any future council wished to consider a rename (or any other change to the organisation's constitution) it will be approached similarly to previous such changes: a community discussion followed by a formal vote by members. No change can be made to the constitution without an affirmative result from a formal poll of members. Regards jonathan From simon at darkmere.gen.nz Sun Oct 16 11:32:13 2022 From: simon at darkmere.gen.nz (Simon Lyall) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 13:32:13 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [Linux-aus] Recent mailing list discussions In-Reply-To: <536AFAC4-AB20-4EE1-9498-81BC6C913D50@herstik.com> References: <822B5518-75A3-40B4-B3B2-D1C1A2226487@addison.net.au> <536AFAC4-AB20-4EE1-9498-81BC6C913D50@herstik.com> Message-ID: <76a527f6-6576-f3d8-68bf-393edf6ea854@darkmere.gen.nz> Joel Addison wrote: > It is time to draw a line under the threads from the past couple of > days on this mailing list and cease discussion on these topics. ? > > I understand there are many views on many topics within the community. > Unfortunately this has moved to a point where this no longer aligns > with the conduct we expect of our community. We have received multiple > complaints about the conduct on this thread.? I am concerned that this discussion has been completely halted. Certainly some posts have been concerning but this should be fixed by stopping those problem posts not the whole discussion. Considering a large part of of the discussion/concern is about the lack of communication between the "People getting stuff done" (PGSD) and the rest of the community it doesn't feel a good look. Now I strongly suspect that these sort of discussions are why the PGSD have avoided communication as much as possible. Fair enough since obviously there isn't much fun being flamed by armchair critics who will probably not do any work etc. I am reminded of a discussion a few months ago where one of the PGSD told off the rest of the list for not volunteering to help, when there had been no indication that any help was needed or welcome. In most organisations a small group do all the work and wish the rest would help out more. LA seems to want less engagement/help. Which might be good for quieter mailing lists in the short term but might be cutting off the next generation of volunteers, councilors and organisers. -- Simon Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.simonlyall.com/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar From kathy at kathyreid.id.au Sun Oct 16 12:33:13 2022 From: kathy at kathyreid.id.au (Kathy Reid) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 12:33:13 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Recent mailing list discussions In-Reply-To: <76a527f6-6576-f3d8-68bf-393edf6ea854@darkmere.gen.nz> References: <822B5518-75A3-40B4-B3B2-D1C1A2226487@addison.net.au> <536AFAC4-AB20-4EE1-9498-81BC6C913D50@herstik.com> <76a527f6-6576-f3d8-68bf-393edf6ea854@darkmere.gen.nz> Message-ID: <774afeb9-e52c-ce01-a365-16db8a117422@kathyreid.id.au> On 16/10/2022 11:32 am, Simon Lyall via linux-aus wrote: > I am reminded of a discussion a few months ago where one of the PGSD > told off the rest of the list for not volunteering to help, when there > had been no indication that any help was needed or welcome. As the "teller-offerer" referenced above, I offer the following: "There were no bids received for LCA2023."? - Russell Stuart, this list, previously. Call for bids for a hybrid conference for LCA2023, April 2021 by Sae Ra Germaine, published to this list. https://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2021-April/023729.html "Ways to help Linux Australia", in "What does Linux Australia do all year?", a presentation at LCA2022 by Sae Ra Germaine and Julien Goodwin, Council Members of Linux Australia 2021-2022 https://youtu.be/ektSl_d0F6Q?t=1504 "We have unfortunately relied on a small pool of return volunteers to help run conferences, be part of sub-committees, be on Council but we need to? do more and we need to do better. Burnout is all too common in our industry and we must do our best not to add burden onto our volunteers giving us what precious time they have left for us. There will always be a component of variable capacity amongst Council and it?s subcommittees. We will take what we can get from people to help us but we need to recognise that we are human, we are volunteers, balls will be dropped and you know what. That is completely ok." - President's Report by Sae Ra Germaine, Linux Australia Annual Report 2021-2022 pp. 7-8 https://linux.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/annual-report-2022-combined-hires.pdf --- The "PGSD" are burning out. They've taken measures, admirably, to reduce that burn out, such as reshaping a hybrid conference to be manageable while safeguarding the community's health, and STILL deliver, with the best of intent, for this community. And what do they get for their efforts? The threads on this list that accuse of them of a lack of transparency. That accuse of them of betraying the values of the organisation they're pouring their unpaid *free* time into. At the risk of this being branded another "telling off" - and echoing Matt Cengia's very wise words - if you don't like how things are run, or what is being done, then: * Stand for LA Council at the next AGM * Volunteer on a Subcommittee of LA Council. * Stand up a Subcommittee for an alternative event, and run the Event That You Want To See Happen. * Volunteer with Everything Open, when the Calls for Volunteers comes out. But let's stop adding work, noise, cognitive load, and emotional labour to the people who are actually getting stuff done. Because these threads are not worthy of their time, their efforts and their energy *in service* of this community. Kathy Reid -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjh at svana.org Sun Oct 16 12:57:44 2022 From: sjh at svana.org (Steven Hanley) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 12:57:44 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Recent mailing list discussions In-Reply-To: <774afeb9-e52c-ce01-a365-16db8a117422@kathyreid.id.au> References: <822B5518-75A3-40B4-B3B2-D1C1A2226487@addison.net.au> <536AFAC4-AB20-4EE1-9498-81BC6C913D50@herstik.com> <76a527f6-6576-f3d8-68bf-393edf6ea854@darkmere.gen.nz> <774afeb9-e52c-ce01-a365-16db8a117422@kathyreid.id.au> Message-ID: <20221016015744.GC23093@svana.org> Great responose Kathy, I like the way you talk. Completely agree, anyone who is upset with where things are, pay attention, volunteer your time, step up and make a difference. Complaining about the work and efforts put in by people volunteering their time (especially when it seems many peple are not realising how much work they put in) is counter productive. Stepping up and helping out is the best way to see things you want to have happen. Steve On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 12:33:13PM +1100, Kathy Reid via linux-aus wrote: > > On 16/10/2022 11:32 am, Simon Lyall via linux-aus wrote: > >I am reminded of a discussion a few months ago where one of the PGSD told > >off the rest of the list for not volunteering to help, when there had been > >no indication that any help was needed or welcome. > > As the "teller-offerer" referenced above, I offer the following: > > "There were no bids received for LCA2023."? - Russell Stuart, this list, > previously. > > Call for bids for a hybrid conference for LCA2023, April 2021 by Sae Ra > Germaine, published to this list. > https://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2021-April/023729.html > > "Ways to help Linux Australia", in "What does Linux Australia do all year?", > a presentation at LCA2022 by Sae Ra Germaine and Julien Goodwin, Council > Members of Linux Australia 2021-2022 > https://youtu.be/ektSl_d0F6Q?t=1504 > > "We have unfortunately relied on a small pool of return volunteers to help > run conferences, be part of sub-committees, be on Council but we need to? do > more and we need to do better. Burnout is all too common in our industry and > we must do our best not to add burden onto our volunteers giving us what > precious time they have left for us. There will always be a component of > variable capacity amongst Council and it???s subcommittees. We will take > what we can get from people to help us but we need to recognise that we are > human, we are volunteers, balls will be dropped and you know what. That is > completely ok." > - President's Report by Sae Ra Germaine, Linux Australia Annual Report > 2021-2022 pp. 7-8 > https://linux.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/annual-report-2022-combined-hires.pdf > > --- > > The "PGSD" are burning out. They've taken measures, admirably, to reduce > that burn out, such as reshaping a hybrid conference to be manageable while > safeguarding the community's health, and STILL deliver, with the best of > intent, for this community. And what do they get for their efforts? The > threads on this list that accuse of them of a lack of transparency. That > accuse of them of betraying the values of the organisation they're pouring > their unpaid *free* time into. > > At the risk of this being branded another "telling off" - and echoing Matt > Cengia's very wise words - if you don't like how things are run, or what is > being done, then: > > * Stand for LA Council at the next AGM > * Volunteer on a Subcommittee of LA Council. > * Stand up a Subcommittee for an alternative event, and run the Event > That You Want To See Happen. > * Volunteer with Everything Open, when the Calls for Volunteers comes > out. > > But let's stop adding work, noise, cognitive load, and emotional labour to > the people who are actually getting stuff done. Because these threads are > not worthy of their time, their efforts and their energy *in service* of > this community. > > Kathy Reid > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -- Steven Hanley sjh at svana.org http://svana.org/sjh/diary we took down all the pictures and then we took down all the walls packed up our expectations and piled em up in the hall yeah we bagged our future and kicked it to the curb and then we stood there unencumbered and we stood there undeterred cuz we were done clinging to the things we were afraid to lose In The Way - Evolve - Ani From marcus at herstik.com Sun Oct 16 16:43:35 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 15:43:35 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] No intent to change name of "Linux Australia" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3C7E3BEA-0C93-44CB-AA10-5BE88786AC60@herstik.com> Hi Jonathan, It wasn?t actually suggested. Rather it was a tongue in cheek reminder that LA has had this discussion and it has been decided. It appears that some LA members are having issue with the EO conference, which I just noticed has it?s own mail list now. I will do a deeper dive into the EO conference later but to me at first glance it looks remarkably similar to the Linux Australia Conference (LAConf) and it?s associated miniconfs. This to me looks like a direct competitor to the LAConf and is even covering many of the same topics. Hence the concern that some of us have had regarding this conference and the lack of a true ?Linux Australia Conference?. Also, I am rather interested as to when the council is planning on holding its AGM as it now has no conference at which to hold it. Can the council provide some indication as to when it intends to do so? (They may want to check the constitution and the act too.) Regards, Marcus Herstik M: 0405-569-466 A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 > On 16 Oct 2022, at 9:44 am, Jonathan Woithe wrote: > > ?Hi everyone > > It has been suggested in recent threads on this list that there were moves > afoot to change the name of "Linux Australia". As a current member of the > Linux Australia Council I would like to make it clear that the current > council has no desire, intent or plan to revisit this. The community > discussed and voted on a change of name in late 2017, and the definitive > result was that the membership did not wish to alter the name. > > Hypothetically, if any future council wished to consider a rename (or any > other change to the organisation's constitution) it will be approached > similarly to previous such changes: a community discussion followed by a > formal vote by members. No change can be made to the constitution without > an affirmative result from a formal poll of members. > > Regards > jonathan > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jwoithe at just42.net Sun Oct 16 17:17:26 2022 From: jwoithe at just42.net (Jonathan Woithe) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 16:47:26 +1030 Subject: [Linux-aus] No intent to change name of "Linux Australia" In-Reply-To: <3C7E3BEA-0C93-44CB-AA10-5BE88786AC60@herstik.com> References: <3C7E3BEA-0C93-44CB-AA10-5BE88786AC60@herstik.com> Message-ID: Hi Marcus On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 03:43:35PM +1000, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: > Also, I am rather interested as to when the council is planning on holding > its AGM as it now has no conference at which to hold it. The 2022 Linux Australia AGM was not held during the online LCA 2022 conference. It was held a week or so before, so those involved in running and attending the online conference didn't have to juggle multiple systems simulateously. There is no constitutional requirement to hold the AGM at an in-person conference. Historically it happened to be convenient to do so because the timing generally matched up. That said, there was an LCA held in April (Canberra 2005 I think) and I can't recall how the LA AGM was handled in that year. > Can the council provide some indication as to when it intends to do so? The next Linux Australia AGM is scheduled for January 2023. The AGM is due in January so that is when it will be held (as has been the case for as long as I can remember off-hand). It will be an online meeting, as was done in 2021 and 2022. The Annual Report will be prepared in November/December and the notice of the AGM and call for nominations will be sent to all members at the appropriate time. All of this is as per the standard procedures and timelines that Council have used for many years. > (They may want to check the constitution and the act too.) The LA constitution permits the AGM to be online. I can assure you that this was checked and confirmed in the lead up to the 2021 AGM. I cannot think of anything else that needs to be checked in the constitution or act in relation to the subject at hand - if you can let me know what else needs to be looked at I'll be happy to follow it up for you. Regards jonathan From kathy at kathyreid.id.au Sun Oct 16 18:03:16 2022 From: kathy at kathyreid.id.au (Kathy Reid) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 18:03:16 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] No intent to change name of "Linux Australia" In-Reply-To: <3C7E3BEA-0C93-44CB-AA10-5BE88786AC60@herstik.com> References: <3C7E3BEA-0C93-44CB-AA10-5BE88786AC60@herstik.com> Message-ID: <0378f588-134d-8d4e-42ce-b8bc20318c09@kathyreid.id.au> I don't want to speak for Council, but given my time with that group (five years in various roles), the following information may be of interest for the curious: Linux Australia Inc.'s constitution can be found here: https://linux.org.au/about-us/constitution/ The relevant sections are 23-34 under "Section 4 - General Meeting".? This gives Council significant leeway in holding AGMs, as long as the AGM is held not longer than 6 months after the end of financial year, which is 30th September, IIRC, and as long as appropriate notice is provided to Members before the AGM - which is 14 days (per Section 24) unless a special resolution is proposed, in which case it is 21 days. Linux Australia Inc. is an incorporated association in NSW and therefore falls under the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/fta1987117/ "Closing the books" on a financial year, and preparing the Annual Report, is a significant undertaking for Council. The Treasurer in particular has to satisfy themselves that the books are correct, arrange an audit, respond to the auditor's questions and queries, and prepare an analysis for the Annual General Meeting. Preparing the Annual Report requires each of the Subcommittees to provide a report of their activities to Council, Office-Bearers must write their report for inclusion, and the Annual Report is then compiled, usually in booklet form. You can see previous Annual Reports at: https://linux.org.au/about-us/annual-reports/ At the same time as prepping the Annual Report, the Council must also arrange an Election for Council, as (per the Constitution), Council Member terms are 12 months (or so - depending on the AGM timing). This requires doing all the comms for the Election (call for nominations, communicating what's required, amending any of the position descriptions - https://github.com/linuxaustralia/position-descriptions), as well as setting up the Election in the CiviCRM system that is part of the backend of linux.conf.au (the Election module was custom built for LA). While voting is going on, Council then seeks to find a Returning Officer and briefs them on the Elections, the Election system and so on. This video explains what's involved in being a Returning Officer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLqxAIeFY64 (This includes a walk through of the Elections database and the x-checks a Returning Officer needs to do). Once the Election closes, the Returning Officer satisfies themselves (or not) that the Election results are valid. The Election results are announced at the AGM. So, there's LOTS of work to prep for an AGM - yes, most of it is documented internally to LA Council, but it's still lots of work, and I am sure that Council is planning for all of this prep work with their AGM timelines. Kind regards, Kathy Reid On 16/10/2022 4:43 pm, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: > > Hi Jonathan, > > It wasn?t actually suggested. Rather it was a tongue in cheek reminder > that LA has had this discussion and it has been decided. > > It appears that some LA members are having issue with the EO > conference, which I just noticed has it?s own mail list now. > > I will do a deeper dive into the EO conference later but to me at > first glance it looks remarkably similar to the Linux ?Australia > Conference (LAConf) and it?s associated miniconfs. > > This to me looks like a direct competitor to the LAConf and is even > covering many of the same topics. > Hence the concern that some of us have had regarding this conference > and the lack of a true ?Linux Australia Conference?. > > Also, I am rather interested as to when the council is planning on > holding its AGM as it now has no conference at which to hold it. > Can the council provide some indication as to when it intends to do > so? (They may want to check the constitution and the act too.) > > Regards, > Marcus Herstik > > M: 0405-569-466 > A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 > >> On 16 Oct 2022, at 9:44 am, Jonathan Woithe wrote: >> >> ?Hi everyone >> >> It has been suggested in recent threads on this list that there were >> moves >> afoot to change the name of "Linux Australia". ?As a current member >> of the >> Linux Australia Council I would like to make it clear that the current >> council has no desire, intent or plan to revisit this. ?The community >> discussed and voted on a change of name in late 2017, and the definitive >> result was that the membership did not wish to alter the name. >> >> Hypothetically, if any future council wished to consider a rename (or any >> other change to the organisation's constitution) it will be approached >> similarly to previous such changes: a community discussion followed by a >> formal vote by members. ?No change can be made to the constitution >> without >> an affirmative result from a formal poll of members. >> >> Regards >> ?jonathan >> > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon at simotek.net Sun Oct 16 18:34:27 2022 From: simon at simotek.net (Simon Lees) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 18:04:27 +1030 Subject: [Linux-aus] Recent mailing list discussions In-Reply-To: <774afeb9-e52c-ce01-a365-16db8a117422@kathyreid.id.au> References: <822B5518-75A3-40B4-B3B2-D1C1A2226487@addison.net.au> <536AFAC4-AB20-4EE1-9498-81BC6C913D50@herstik.com> <76a527f6-6576-f3d8-68bf-393edf6ea854@darkmere.gen.nz> <774afeb9-e52c-ce01-a365-16db8a117422@kathyreid.id.au> Message-ID: <878ca02c-222f-e2f1-b593-c1be671427e8@simotek.net> Hi, On 10/16/22 12:03, Kathy Reid via linux-aus wrote: > > On 16/10/2022 11:32 am, Simon Lyall via linux-aus wrote: >> I am reminded of a discussion a few months ago where one of the PGSD >> told off the rest of the list for not volunteering to help, when there >> had been no indication that any help was needed or welcome. > > As the "teller-offerer" referenced above, I offer the following: > > "There were no bids received for LCA2023."? - Russell Stuart, this list, > previously. > > Call for bids for a hybrid conference for LCA2023, April 2021 by Sae Ra > Germaine, published to this list. > https://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2021-April/023729.html > > "Ways to help Linux Australia", in "What does Linux Australia do all > year?", a presentation at LCA2022 by Sae Ra Germaine and Julien Goodwin, > Council Members of Linux Australia 2021-2022 > https://youtu.be/ektSl_d0F6Q?t=1504 > > "We have unfortunately relied on a small pool of return volunteers to > help run conferences, be part of sub-committees, be on Council but we > need to? do more and we need to do better. Burnout is all too common in > our industry and we must do our best not to add burden onto our > volunteers giving us what precious time they have left for us. There > will always be a component of variable capacity amongst Council and it?s > subcommittees. We will take what we can get from people to help us but > we need to recognise that we are human, we are volunteers, balls will be > dropped and you know what. That is completely ok." > - President's Report by Sae Ra Germaine, Linux Australia Annual Report > 2021-2022 pp. 7-8 > https://linux.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/annual-report-2022-combined-hires.pdf > > --- > > The "PGSD" are burning out. They've taken measures, admirably, to reduce > that burn out, such as reshaping a hybrid conference to be manageable > while safeguarding the community's health, and STILL deliver, with the > best of intent, for this community. And what do they get for their > efforts? The threads on this list that accuse of them of a lack of > transparency. That accuse of them of betraying the values of the > organisation they're pouring their unpaid *free* time into. > > At the risk of this being branded another "telling off" - and echoing > Matt Cengia's very wise words - if you don't like how things are run, or > what is being done, then: > > * Stand for LA Council at the next AGM > * Volunteer on a Subcommittee of LA Council. > * Stand up a Subcommittee for an alternative event, and run the Event > That You Want To See Happen. > * Volunteer with Everything Open, when the Calls for Volunteers comes > out. > > But let's stop adding work, noise, cognitive load, and emotional labour > to the people who are actually getting stuff done. Because these threads > are not worthy of their time, their efforts and their energy *in > service* of this community. While I agree with much of the sentiment here having spent several years on boards of various open source projects i've learned that as much communication as possible is key, while understanding that sometimes there are very good reasons not to communicate certain things. My perception (and therefore I presume others) based off the communication we've received this year, especially the thread in June was that everything was ok and lca 2023 would be happening somewhat as previously. As such I found the announcement of a new but similar seeming conference with a different name and format and no mention of LCA somewhat a surprise as it seems did many in the community. Personally I believe that we probably wouldn't have been as much of a shock / surprise to people if there had been a much earlier announcement maybe once the proposal was accepted, along the lines of As we have received no expressions of interest to host LCA 23, we are now looking at holing a conference with similar goals but a different structure and in a different time frame if anyone would like to help being involved in organising please reach out to us. Maybe even asking for feedback then wading through the inevitable flamewar to see if there is a consensus from most parts of the community (Unfortunately I know how unpleasant this step can be and can understand why people may not really want to do it). Finally I have the greatest respect for everything the board is doing as someone who's been on a board that oversees other conferences and communities I know the work and effort required, if there were more hours in a day LA is something i'd certainly contribute more too but as i've learned over time there is only one of me and I need to choose which projects get my time very carefully. Anyway if nothing else I hope its something people can learn from, I look forward to hopefully seeing you all in person or online at EO Simon From marcus at herstik.com Sun Oct 16 20:28:31 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 19:28:31 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] No intent to change name of "Linux Australia" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Jonathan, Just an FYI as our president advised people to read the rules so I did. I wasn't talking about whether it could be held online but rather the time when it must be held. Part of the query is because there is a conference that is in mid March and as you pointed out usually the AGM is held around the conference. My reason is because the constitution states it must be held within 6 months of end of financial year. (See section 23.1.a) As our constitution is a little out of date it states extensions are requested from the Director-General of the Department of Services, Technology and Administration, which no longer exists. Luckily we can consult the Regulations, which states to look at the Act, section 37(2)(b) which says the secretary of numerous departments. The constitution may need to be updated to reflect the correct Act and remove the date of the regulations and instead just refer to them. Our association?s FY ends on 30 Sept as stated in s43. (As pointed out already). Therefore if was due to be held after the conference it needed to be very soon as it needs to be before 31 March. Regards, Marcus Herstik M: 0405-569-466 A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 > On 16 Oct 2022, at 4:17 pm, Jonathan Woithe wrote: > ?Hi Marcus > > On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 03:43:35PM +1000, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: >> Also, I am rather interested as to when the council is planning on holding >> its AGM as it now has no conference at which to hold it. > > The 2022 Linux Australia AGM was not held during the online LCA 2022 > conference. It was held a week or so before, so those involved in running > and attending the online conference didn't have to juggle multiple systems > simulateously. There is no constitutional requirement to hold the AGM at an > in-person conference. Historically it happened to be convenient to do so > because the timing generally matched up. That said, there was an LCA held > in April (Canberra 2005 I think) and I can't recall how the LA AGM was > handled in that year. > >> Can the council provide some indication as to when it intends to do so? > > The next Linux Australia AGM is scheduled for January 2023. The AGM is due > in January so that is when it will be held (as has been the case for as long > as I can remember off-hand). It will be an online meeting, as was done in > 2021 and 2022. The Annual Report will be prepared in November/December and > the notice of the AGM and call for nominations will be sent to all members > at the appropriate time. All of this is as per the standard procedures and > timelines that Council have used for many years. > >> (They may want to check the constitution and the act too.) > > The LA constitution permits the AGM to be online. I can assure you that > this was checked and confirmed in the lead up to the 2021 AGM. I cannot > think of anything else that needs to be checked in the constitution or act > in relation to the subject at hand - if you can let me know what else needs > to be looked at I'll be happy to follow it up for you. > > Regards > jonathan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paulway at mabula.net Sun Oct 16 20:53:40 2022 From: paulway at mabula.net (Paul Wayper) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 20:53:40 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: On 15/10/22 10:33 am, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > On 15/10/22 08:16, Paul Wayper via linux-aus wrote: >> The LA Council summarily dismissed the bid.? No conversation was entered >> into.? We were told it wasn't suitable. > > The bid was for a hybrid in-person/online conference, and it made it clear > the team was not interested in running a purely online conference. The > proposal was put in while COVID was in full swing.? It was effectively > "betting" the COVID restrictions would be lifted. That was not how we "bet".? I'm sorry, but that's misrepresenting our bid.? And I'm sure people's own memories will remind them of the differences between the restrictions in February 2021, when the bid was submitted, and those in January 2022 when the conference would have occurred. Thank you though, Russell, for admitting that yes there was actually a bid.? You and the LA Council had said in the past there were no bids.? It might have been one you rejected, but it was still a bid.? I'm glad you've set the record straight. And I note that Joel has effectively said that OE 2023 will be a "hybrid" conference, with much the same model as we proposed: that people could attend in person or online depending on their own views of the COVID and other risks, and they would use the online tools used by LCA 2021 to make sure there was a healthy online interaction with the speakers and the talks.? So the LA Council has made the same "bet" on a hybrid EO 2023 that it previously rejected in a hybrid LCA 2022.? What's changed? > Finally, the current executive was surprised by your characterisation of the > communications from the 2021 council, so this morning we dug up their > written response to the bid. Yes, it said the TL;DR is a motion was moved to > accept the bid, but it failed for lack of votes. It didn't reveal the > private deliberations of the council of course, but it did discuss the > ruminations that happened in general terms. I won't publish the full > response here (it's quite lengthy and maybe you would prefer we didn't do > that, but feel free to do it yourself). Instead here are two quotes from it: > > - We have also discussed the current COVID-19 situation > > - We would like to extend an invitation to this team to submit a bid for > LCA2023 It's a pity then that the LA council didn't write to the organisers of that bid when it was clear to them that there weren't any others around for LCA 2023. This is all water under the bridge now.? I just wanted to put the record straight that there was actually a bid that the LA Council rejected.? And I think the LA Council should establish a clear process of communication about conferences that the LA Council has decided it wants bids for, including: * Notification of start of bidding process. * Notification of end of bidding process, including number of bids submitted (before the Council has decided whether to accept them or not). * If a bid has been selected, then a success should be announced as soon as possible (perhaps without disclosing which bid has been successful). * If there were no bids selected by the LA council, then this also needs to be announced as soon as possible. * If the LA council accepts any bid in which LA Council members are a part of the bidding team, those members must abstain from voting. * If the LA council has no bids for a conference, any team bidding for it must notify the LA council as soon as they can.? If this happens, the LA council must notify its membership that a new bid is being considered. It's the lack of transparency from the LA Council over this whole issue that has disappointed me the most.? That is the thing I would like to see rectified.? After all, we do want to Open Everything, don't we? Regards, Paul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au Sun Oct 16 21:03:48 2022 From: russell-linuxaus at stuart.id.au (Russell Stuart) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 20:03:48 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: <43969bed-8129-8649-86f8-5c185b721f2c@stuart.id.au> On 16/10/22 19:53, Paul Wayper via linux-aus wrote: > Thank you though, Russell, for admitting that yes there was actually a > bid.? You and the LA Council had said in the past there were no bids. > It might have been one you rejected, but it was still a bid. Yes, you are correct. It was a bid, and a fair bit of effort had gone into it. Had circumstances been different, it may well have been accepted. Apologies to everyone for getting it wrong. From marcus at herstik.com Sun Oct 16 23:07:01 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 22:07:01 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. Message-ID: Let me see if I can provide the timeline and point out why some people may be a little upset with the lack of communication from Linux Australia (LA), the lack of a Linux Conference Australia (LCA) and the new EverythingOpen (EO) conference. While I have looked at the LA mail list archive from December 2021 to now to ensure a full grasp and also so that I am not forgetting something I may have dismissed in haste there is no guarantee provided. You can check the list archive yourself. On June 12th there was an email asking about what is happening with LCA 2023. It was advised that the ?LA council have been discussing this over the past few months?. They?ll LA council would have an announcement in the next few weeks. Nothing else material except for the comment by Steven Ellis on June 13 that he hoped ?something is going on elsewhere we don't know about.? Yet nothing is said. Again LA was asked between July 26-30th about LCA for 2023. After a brief reply and a pithy response commenting about ?so many dedicated volunteers helping? and after advising to ?submit patches? there was a retort that this has been requested for at least a month and it was noted that there was no request for assistance and a bit more discussion without any information. I must note that there was a few emails regarding the time and effort needed to put on an LCA that people may find enlightening. (See Paul Wayper on June 13 and Kathy Reid on July 30th.) I might also note that at this time there have been no calls for an LCA 2024 so far. August 3rd we got an update that it was close to resolved and start sounding out for speakers. September 30th - Rip/Vale LCA email starts this type of discussion. I am happy to be proven wrong but I can see no official update on LCA provided. After the RIP/Vale email then an announcement about EO was posted. It has since been said that the unacceptable bid (if it may be called that) was advised. However without access to the committee meeting minutes it is difficult to see what happened. (I might note that the Constitution allows for asking for these under section 40(1)(a), but don?t take my word on it - read it yourself) So when some members state there is a lack of transparency, it is hard to disagree. This is because there were multiple requests for information and despite assurances to the contrary nothing was provided, at least publicly. I certainly can not point to any communication despite others having multiple attempts at asking what is happening. There was no further requests for help or for people to put a conference on, nor does there appear to be advice that an alternative was being investigated by the council. What are the members supposed to think? We are told we don?t step up and we need to be grateful for online conferences despite the fact that some people want to go back to F2F conferences, to the dismay of others. So it appears either we (the members) were forgotten, lied to or misled that information would be forthcoming, or something else happened. The question is what happened? So why are people upset? Because what could be perceived as a very similar conference, sponsored by LA (whatever that means - could one assume financial assistance?) that has some similar categories to the LCA miniconfs and potentially taking the place of the LCA. The website specifically says ?Linux Australia has decided to run this event to provide a space for a cross-section of the open technologies communities to come together in person.? It also says ?The presentations cover a broad range of subject areas, including Linux, open source software, open hardware, open data, open government, open GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums), to name a few.? I?m sorry but it looks darn similar. It even states it uses the LA code of conduct with ?All attendees of Everything Open 2023 agree to be bound by the Linux Australia Code of Conduct.? When was it decided that LCA would be dropped in favour of EO? Is there a team that has decided they don?t want to do LCA but still want the same thing so they made EO? I?m very confused by this conference. So is this LCA2023 by another name? If not, why not? And why has there been no call for 2024? Just my 2c and an attempt at timeline and sorting out. Regards, Marcus Herstik M: 0405-569-466 A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jwoithe at just42.net Sun Oct 16 23:51:56 2022 From: jwoithe at just42.net (Jonathan Woithe) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 23:21:56 +1030 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 10:07:01PM +1000, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: > [conference] sponsored by LA (whatever that means - could one assume > financial assistance?) ... EverythingOpen 2023 is auspiced by LA, in exactly the same way that LCA and other LA events have been in the past. As Russell S has pointed out, one of the primary questions when evaluating event proposals is that the event is expected to at least break even. LA auspices the event by providing seed money to cover large upfront costs which are often associated with events, banking and accounting infrastructure, public liability insurance and other support structures as outlined in the Subcommittee Policy[1]. This is not monetary sponsorship (at least not in the traditional sense): the expectation is that any funds advanced to the event's subcommittee will be returned to LA. The full details of the arrangements applicable to Event Subcommittees is found in LA's Subcommittee Policy[1]. There is perhaps merit in considering the way that "run" has been used in place of "auspice" in the past and present. I expect that for some, "run" is clearer as it's a term they are familiar with, while others would prefer the more specific "auspice". Regards jonathan [1] https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/blob/master/subcommittee_policy_v3.md From kenosti at gmail.com Mon Oct 17 00:06:39 2022 From: kenosti at gmail.com (Anestis Kozakis) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 00:06:39 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> Message-ID: I've never been able to attend an LCA, and, of course, COVID made that not possible for a couple of years. Also, I mostly sit on the sidelines and read through e-mails, and usually don't comment. However, it seems to me, in this case, the LA Council has been less than open and forthright regarding their intentions and motives. >From all the back-and-forth e-mails, a bid was received, and, from my understanding, it was the only bid received, to run LCA in 2022. However, the LA Council seemed to reject the bid without providing any reasons why. it seems the LA Council did the wrong thing here. If it was the only bid submitted, but the LA Council felt it didn't fit the need, why not open communications with those who put the bid together and discuss with them the perceived issues with the bid so it could be restructured to meet the Council's criteria and be approved? The lack of communication from the Council is very concerning, and then for the Council to turn around and say "We're running something else instead of LCA" just seems at odds with the way things are supposed to be done. Why didn't the council work with the bid team to provide feedback on the bid so it could be fine-tuned, especially if it was the only bid received? For a Council member to initially say "We received no bids", and then to backtrack when provided with evidence to the contrary also seems very odd. Where is the transparency and openness? If the Council wants the community to trust it, then it needs to build that trust, and these actions certainly aren't building any trust that I can see. Just my two cents. Anestis. On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 at 20:54, Paul Wayper via linux-aus < linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > On 15/10/22 10:33 am, Russell Stuart via linux-aus wrote: > > On 15/10/22 08:16, Paul Wayper via linux-aus wrote: > > The LA Council summarily dismissed the bid. No conversation was entered > into. We were told it wasn't suitable. > > > The bid was for a hybrid in-person/online conference, and it made it clear > the team was not interested in running a purely online conference. The > proposal was put in while COVID was in full swing. It was effectively > "betting" the COVID restrictions would be lifted. > > That was not how we "bet". I'm sorry, but that's misrepresenting our > bid. And I'm sure people's own memories will remind them of the > differences between the restrictions in February 2021, when the bid was > submitted, and those in January 2022 when the conference would have > occurred. > > Thank you though, Russell, for admitting that yes there was actually a > bid. You and the LA Council had said in the past there were no bids. It > might have been one you rejected, but it was still a bid. I'm glad you've > set the record straight. > > And I note that Joel has effectively said that OE 2023 will be a "hybrid" > conference, with much the same model as we proposed: that people could > attend in person or online depending on their own views of the COVID and > other risks, and they would use the online tools used by LCA 2021 to make > sure there was a healthy online interaction with the speakers and the > talks. So the LA Council has made the same "bet" on a hybrid EO 2023 that > it previously rejected in a hybrid LCA 2022. What's changed? > > Finally, the current executive was surprised by your characterisation of > the communications from the 2021 council, so this morning we dug up their > written response to the bid. Yes, it said the TL;DR is a motion was moved > to accept the bid, but it failed for lack of votes. It didn't reveal the > private deliberations of the council of course, but it did discuss the > ruminations that happened in general terms. I won't publish the full > response here (it's quite lengthy and maybe you would prefer we didn't do > that, but feel free to do it yourself). Instead here are two quotes from > it: > > - We have also discussed the current COVID-19 situation > > - We would like to extend an invitation to this team to submit a bid for > LCA2023 > > It's a pity then that the LA council didn't write to the organisers of > that bid when it was clear to them that there weren't any others around for > LCA 2023. > > This is all water under the bridge now. I just wanted to put the record > straight that there was actually a bid that the LA Council rejected. And I > think the LA Council should establish a clear process of communication > about conferences that the LA Council has decided it wants bids for, > including: > > * Notification of start of bidding process. > > * Notification of end of bidding process, including number of bids > submitted (before the Council has decided whether to accept them or not). > > * If a bid has been selected, then a success should be announced as soon > as possible (perhaps without disclosing which bid has been successful). > > * If there were no bids selected by the LA council, then this also needs > to be announced as soon as possible. > > * If the LA council accepts any bid in which LA Council members are a part > of the bidding team, those members must abstain from voting. > > * If the LA council has no bids for a conference, any team bidding for it > must notify the LA council as soon as they can. If this happens, the LA > council must notify its membership that a new bid is being considered. > > It's the lack of transparency from the LA Council over this whole issue > that has disappointed me the most. That is the thing I would like to see > rectified. After all, we do want to Open Everything, don't we? > Regards, > > Paul > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -- Anestis Kozakis | kenosti at gmail.com - "In Numenera, players are not rewarded for slaying foes in combat, so using a smart idea to avoid combat and still succeed is just good play. Likewise, coming up with an idea to defeat a foe without hammering on it with weapons is encouraged - creativity is not cheating!" - Numenera Core RuleBook - Page 102 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joel at addison.net.au Mon Oct 17 00:55:15 2022 From: joel at addison.net.au (Joel Addison) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 23:55:15 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Recent mailing list discussions In-Reply-To: <878ca02c-222f-e2f1-b593-c1be671427e8@simotek.net> References: <822B5518-75A3-40B4-B3B2-D1C1A2226487@addison.net.au> <536AFAC4-AB20-4EE1-9498-81BC6C913D50@herstik.com> <76a527f6-6576-f3d8-68bf-393edf6ea854@darkmere.gen.nz> <774afeb9-e52c-ce01-a365-16db8a117422@kathyreid.id.au> <878ca02c-222f-e2f1-b593-c1be671427e8@simotek.net> Message-ID: <76A45200-A290-4EDC-B335-0879AD3E39D9@addison.net.au> > On 16 Oct 2022, at 17:34, Simon Lees via linux-aus wrote: > > Hi, > > On 10/16/22 12:03, Kathy Reid via linux-aus wrote: >> On 16/10/2022 11:32 am, Simon Lyall via linux-aus wrote: >>> I am reminded of a discussion a few months ago where one of the PGSD told off the rest of the list for not volunteering to help, when there had been no indication that any help was needed or welcome. >> As the "teller-offerer" referenced above, I offer the following: >> "There were no bids received for LCA2023." - Russell Stuart, this list, previously. >> Call for bids for a hybrid conference for LCA2023, April 2021 by Sae Ra Germaine, published to this list. >> https://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2021-April/023729.html >> "Ways to help Linux Australia", in "What does Linux Australia do all year?", a presentation at LCA2022 by Sae Ra Germaine and Julien Goodwin, Council Members of Linux Australia 2021-2022 >> https://youtu.be/ektSl_d0F6Q?t=1504 >> "We have unfortunately relied on a small pool of return volunteers to help run conferences, be part of sub-committees, be on Council but we need to do more and we need to do better. Burnout is all too common in our industry and we must do our best not to add burden onto our volunteers giving us what precious time they have left for us. There will always be a component of variable capacity amongst Council and it?s subcommittees. We will take what we can get from people to help us but we need to recognise that we are human, we are volunteers, balls will be dropped and you know what. That is completely ok." >> - President's Report by Sae Ra Germaine, Linux Australia Annual Report 2021-2022 pp. 7-8 >> https://linux.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/annual-report-2022-combined-hires.pdf >> --- >> The "PGSD" are burning out. They've taken measures, admirably, to reduce that burn out, such as reshaping a hybrid conference to be manageable while safeguarding the community's health, and STILL deliver, with the best of intent, for this community. And what do they get for their efforts? The threads on this list that accuse of them of a lack of transparency. That accuse of them of betraying the values of the organisation they're pouring their unpaid *free* time into. >> At the risk of this being branded another "telling off" - and echoing Matt Cengia's very wise words - if you don't like how things are run, or what is being done, then: >> * Stand for LA Council at the next AGM >> * Volunteer on a Subcommittee of LA Council. >> * Stand up a Subcommittee for an alternative event, and run the Event >> That You Want To See Happen. >> * Volunteer with Everything Open, when the Calls for Volunteers comes >> out. >> But let's stop adding work, noise, cognitive load, and emotional labour to the people who are actually getting stuff done. Because these threads are not worthy of their time, their efforts and their energy *in service* of this community. > > While I agree with much of the sentiment here having spent several years on boards of various open source projects i've learned that as much communication as possible is key, while understanding that sometimes there are very good reasons not to communicate certain things. > > My perception (and therefore I presume others) based off the communication we've received this year, especially the thread in June was that everything was ok and lca 2023 would be happening somewhat as previously. As such I found the announcement of a new but similar seeming conference with a different name and format and no mention of LCA somewhat a surprise as it seems did many in the community. > > Personally I believe that we probably wouldn't have been as much of a shock / surprise to people if there had been a much earlier announcement maybe once the proposal was accepted, along the lines of As we have received no expressions of interest to host LCA 23, we are now looking at holing a conference with similar goals but a different structure and in a different time frame if anyone would like to help being involved in organising please reach out to us. Maybe even asking for feedback then wading through the inevitable flamewar to see if there is a consensus from most parts of the community (Unfortunately I know how unpleasant this step can be and can understand why people may not really want to do it). > > Finally I have the greatest respect for everything the board is doing as someone who's been on a board that oversees other conferences and communities I know the work and effort required, if there were more hours in a day LA is something i'd certainly contribute more too but as i've learned over time there is only one of me and I need to choose which projects get my time very carefully. > > Anyway if nothing else I hope its something people can learn from, I look forward to hopefully seeing you all in person or online at EO > > Simon Thank you for your points Simon. I agree we could have done some things differently, and hindsight helps immensely with that. The announcement timing overall was later than we would have liked, but was done as soon as we knew everything was in place to proceed. Booking venues takes a while to sort out, and my responses earlier in the year about having details soon was because I thought we were close to the end of the process, but as happens there were further changes that needed to be made on a number of occasions before everything was locked in. The last thing we wanted to do is announce the conference and then run into an issue meaning we couldn't follow through. Just like many people in the community, the Council is comprised of members who are all very busy. We worked as fast as we could to get everything planned out ready to announce. We've done the first part now, and the team is now getting on with the job of opening the Call for Sessions. We look forward to seeing you at Everything Open, in person or online. Joel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joel at addison.net.au Mon Oct 17 01:39:34 2022 From: joel at addison.net.au (Joel Addison) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 00:39:34 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09EA6128-A82F-4D91-BE5C-66AA3B70E953@addison.net.au> > On 16 Oct 2022, at 22:07, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: > > Let me see if I can provide the timeline and point out why some people may be a little upset with the lack of communication from Linux Australia (LA), the lack of a Linux Conference Australia (LCA) and the new EverythingOpen (EO) conference. > While I have looked at the LA mail list archive from December 2021 to now to ensure a full grasp and also so that I am not forgetting something I may have dismissed in haste there is no guarantee provided. You can check the list archive yourself. > > On June 12th there was an email asking about what is happening with LCA 2023. It was advised that the ?LA council have been discussing this over the past few months?. They?ll LA council would have an announcement in the next few weeks. > > Nothing else material except for the comment by Steven Ellis on June 13 that he hoped ?something is going on elsewhere we don't know about.? Yet nothing is said. > > Again LA was asked between July 26-30th about LCA for 2023. > After a brief reply and a pithy response commenting about ?so many dedicated volunteers helping? and after advising to ?submit patches? there was a retort that this has been requested for at least a month and it was noted that there was no request for assistance and a bit more discussion without any information. > > I must note that there was a few emails regarding the time and effort needed to put on an LCA that people may find enlightening. (See Paul Wayper on June 13 and Kathy Reid on July 30th.) > > I might also note that at this time there have been no calls for an LCA 2024 so far. > > August 3rd we got an update that it was close to resolved and start sounding out for speakers. > > September 30th - Rip/Vale LCA email starts this type of discussion. > > I am happy to be proven wrong but I can see no official update on LCA provided. After the RIP/Vale email then an announcement about EO was posted. > > It has since been said that the unacceptable bid (if it may be called that) was advised. However without access to the committee meeting minutes it is difficult to see what happened. (I might note that the Constitution allows for asking for these under section 40(1)(a), but don?t take my word on it - read it yourself) > > So when some members state there is a lack of transparency, it is hard to disagree. > This is because there were multiple requests for information and despite assurances to the contrary nothing was provided, at least publicly. I certainly can not point to any communication despite others having multiple attempts at asking what is happening. > There was no further requests for help or for people to put a conference on, nor does there appear to be advice that an alternative was being investigated by the council. > > What are the members supposed to think? > We are told we don?t step up and we need to be grateful for online conferences despite the fact that some people want to go back to F2F conferences, to the dismay of others. > > So it appears either we (the members) were forgotten, lied to or misled that information would be forthcoming, or something else happened. The question is what happened? > > So why are people upset? > Because what could be perceived as a very similar conference, sponsored by LA (whatever that means - could one assume financial assistance?) that has some similar categories to the LCA miniconfs and potentially taking the place of the LCA. > The website specifically says ?Linux Australia has decided to run this event to provide a space for a cross-section of the open technologies communities to come together in person.? > It also says ?The presentations cover a broad range of subject areas, including Linux, open source software, open hardware, open data, open government, open GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums), to name a few.? > > I?m sorry but it looks darn similar. It even states it uses the LA code of conduct with ?All attendees of Everything Open 2023 agree to be bound by the Linux Australia Code of Conduct.? > > When was it decided that LCA would be dropped in favour of EO? > Is there a team that has decided they don?t want to do LCA but still want the same thing so they made EO? > I?m very confused by this conference. > So is this LCA2023 by another name? > If not, why not? > > And why has there been no call for 2024? > > Just my 2c and an attempt at timeline and sorting out. > > Regards, > Marcus Herstik Linux Australia has decided to hold Everything Open in 2023. As you have seen, there is much overlap, because it is the natural evolution of what we have seen with linux.conf.au. Everything Open will still cover everything we have seen at LCA, something I think you've picked up on given the large overlap with announcement and website content. It is designed to be inclusive to all members of the free and open source technologies communities, giving people from all of the areas that Linux Australia represents an avenue to come together to share knowledge. There will still be other conferences auspiced by Linux Australia in 2023 and beyond, focusing on specific communities, e.g. PyCon AU, DrupalSouth, WordCamps, etc. The 3 day duration of EO2023 is the same as the past two online conferences, given it is the first event in a few years with an in person component, and that there is still uncertainty around what might be going on in the world, how many people are able and willing to travel, etc. There is a longer overview on the base website: https://everythingopen.au/news/introducing-everything-open/ We will also have more to say as we go - we have only done the first announcement so far. As is usual, the Call for Volunteers will go out a bit later on. Getting ahead of the announcement, we are looking at opening this in November. Feel free to mark your calendar to look out for this. All subcommittees and events that are auspiced by Linux Australia are required to have a Code of Conduct in place. Linux Australia has a Code of Conduct, and this is the one that most end up adopting. Given Everything Open is auspiced by Linux Australia, it shouldn't be a surprised that the Code of Conduct is shared. As for 2024, Council has been occupied with getting the 2023 conference announced, because we thought it was more important to get 2023 sorted before looking to future years. Of course we haven't forgotten that we also need to get the ball rolling for 2024 and beyond, and there will be further details sent out once they are ready. Regards, Joel Addison -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marcus at herstik.com Mon Oct 17 09:42:36 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:42:36 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: <09EA6128-A82F-4D91-BE5C-66AA3B70E953@addison.net.au> References: <09EA6128-A82F-4D91-BE5C-66AA3B70E953@addison.net.au> Message-ID: No offence to the people who work hard and do the work of running the LA. However it appears to me they have gone a direction some members do not approve and have taken the reigns and pushed the organisation in a particular direction. See notes below. > On 17 Oct 2022, at 12:39 am, Joel Addison wrote: > > ? >> On 16 Oct 2022, at 22:07, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: >> >> Let me see if I can provide the timeline and point out why some people may be a little upset with the lack of communication from Linux Australia (LA), the lack of a Linux Conference Australia (LCA) and the new EverythingOpen (EO) conference. >> While I have looked at the LA mail list archive from December 2021 to now to ensure a full grasp and also so that I am not forgetting something I may have dismissed in haste there is no guarantee provided. You can check the list archive yourself. >> >> On June 12th there was an email asking about what is happening with LCA 2023. It was advised that the ?LA council have been discussing this over the past few months?. They?ll LA council would have an announcement in the next few weeks. >> >> Nothing else material except for the comment by Steven Ellis on June 13 that he hoped ?something is going on elsewhere we don't know about.? Yet nothing is said. >> >> Again LA was asked between July 26-30th about LCA for 2023. >> After a brief reply and a pithy response commenting about ?so many dedicated volunteers helping? and after advising to ?submit patches? there was a retort that this has been requested for at least a month and it was noted that there was no request for assistance and a bit more discussion without any information. >> >> I must note that there was a few emails regarding the time and effort needed to put on an LCA that people may find enlightening. (See Paul Wayper on June 13 and Kathy Reid on July 30th.) >> >> I might also note that at this time there have been no calls for an LCA 2024 so far. >> >> August 3rd we got an update that it was close to resolved and start sounding out for speakers. >> >> September 30th - Rip/Vale LCA email starts this type of discussion. >> >> I am happy to be proven wrong but I can see no official update on LCA provided. After the RIP/Vale email then an announcement about EO was posted. >> >> It has since been said that the unacceptable bid (if it may be called that) was advised. However without access to the committee meeting minutes it is difficult to see what happened. (I might note that the Constitution allows for asking for these under section 40(1)(a), but don?t take my word on it - read it yourself) >> >> So when some members state there is a lack of transparency, it is hard to disagree. >> This is because there were multiple requests for information and despite assurances to the contrary nothing was provided, at least publicly. I certainly can not point to any communication despite others having multiple attempts at asking what is happening. >> There was no further requests for help or for people to put a conference on, nor does there appear to be advice that an alternative was being investigated by the council. >> >> What are the members supposed to think? >> We are told we don?t step up and we need to be grateful for online conferences despite the fact that some people want to go back to F2F conferences, to the dismay of others. >> >> So it appears either we (the members) were forgotten, lied to or misled that information would be forthcoming, or something else happened. The question is what happened? >> >> So why are people upset? >> Because what could be perceived as a very similar conference, sponsored by LA (whatever that means - could one assume financial assistance?) that has some similar categories to the LCA miniconfs and potentially taking the place of the LCA. >> The website specifically says ?Linux Australia has decided to run this event to provide a space for a cross-section of the open technologies communities to come together in person.? >> It also says ?The presentations cover a broad range of subject areas, including Linux, open source software, open hardware, open data, open government, open GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums), to name a few.? >> >> I?m sorry but it looks darn similar. It even states it uses the LA code of conduct with ?All attendees of Everything Open 2023 agree to be bound by the Linux Australia Code of Conduct.? >> >> When was it decided that LCA would be dropped in favour of EO? >> Is there a team that has decided they don?t want to do LCA but still want the same thing so they made EO? >> I?m very confused by this conference. >> So is this LCA2023 by another name? >> If not, why not? >> >> And why has there been no call for 2024? >> >> Just my 2c and an attempt at timeline and sorting out. >> >> Regards, >> Marcus Herstik > > > Linux Australia has decided to hold Everything Open in 2023. As you have seen, there is much overlap, because it is the natural evolution of what we have seen with linux.conf.au. So basically it is LCA by another name. > Everything Open will still cover everything we have seen at LCA, something I think you've picked up on given the large overlap with announcement and website content. It is designed to be inclusive to all members of the free and open source technologies communities, giving people from all of the areas that Linux Australia represents an avenue to come together to share knowledge. There will still be other conferences auspiced by Linux Australia in 2023 and beyond, focusing on specific communities, e.g. PyCon AU, DrupalSouth, WordCamps, etc. But no LCA. Got it. > The 3 day duration of EO2023 is the same as the past two online conferences, given it is the first event in a few years with an in person component, Except for the one that was submitted but rejected. > and that there is still uncertainty around what might be going on in the world, how many people are able and willing to travel, etc. Ok. So what? Why was the 2022 bid not suggested earlier to consider moving to 2023? > There is a longer overview on the base website: https://everythingopen.au/news/introducing-everything-open/ > We will also have more to say as we go - we have only done the first announcement so far. > From this page ? It is with all of this in mind that Linux Australia has decided to organise Everything Open 2023, a new conference that embraces all facets of open technology?. Congratulations - it seems you have declared this the new LCA. Who made this decision? Who is this group that have organised EO? > As is usual, the Call for Volunteers will go out a bit later on. Getting ahead of the announcement, we are looking at opening this in November. Feel free to mark your calendar to look out for this. > > All subcommittees and events that are auspiced by Linux Australia are required to have a Code of Conduct in place. Linux Australia has a Code of Conduct, and this is the one that most end up adopting. Given Everything Open is auspiced by Linux Australia, it shouldn't be a surprised that the Code of Conduct is shared. > > As for 2024, Council has been occupied with getting the 2023 conference announced, because we thought it was more important to get 2023 sorted before looking to future years. Of course we haven't forgotten that we also need to get the ball rolling for 2024 and beyond, and there will be further details sent out once they are ready. > > Regards, > > Joel Addison > So it seems council made a specific and direct decision to create a conference different but similar to LCA. Can I ask why this decision was made? Please also answer the in line questions. Regards, Marcus Herstik M: 0405-569-466 A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From info at petermoulding.com Mon Oct 17 11:09:13 2022 From: info at petermoulding.com (Info) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 11:09:13 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> <676032CE-EC30-4721-B5A0-172326D4E18F@addison.net.au> <3b22c35e-eeaa-b607-9387-13b868ace9b0@icloud.com> Message-ID: <4d73057a-1d60-6d34-f217-6bdf2a6899cd@petermoulding.com> On 15/10/22 17:31, Joel Addison via linux-aus wrote: > Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre Nice spot. Helped with some conferences there. Next to the Polly Woodside. My mum lived on a boat at those docks as a kid. Accommodation is a bit tight there. If anyone spots a good deal for 1 or 2 adults, Let me know. For me, the nearest free accommodation is 2 hours by train. :-( When is the topic list, calls for speakers, whatever, so I can see what days would be useful? Day tickets? Peter From anne at coherentdigital.com.au Mon Oct 17 11:16:18 2022 From: anne at coherentdigital.com.au (Anne) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 11:16:18 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: References: <09EA6128-A82F-4D91-BE5C-66AA3B70E953@addison.net.au> Message-ID: Hi Marcus I understand you're unhappy about the way OE was announced. I can't see how continually questioning the people who are bankrolling OE is going to achieve anything. What's happened has happened, and can't be undone or changed. Given the people concerned are volunteers, with a day job and a life to fit in as well, it's not surprising some members consider communication lacking. Corporates who pay people to communicate with the public full time suffer from that problem too. Perhaps you could explain what you'd like to see happen next? What actions can be taken to address your concerns? That question applies to anyone else who is also unhappy. Rather than obsess about the past, let's work out how to fix this and move on. Personally, I am sad that LCA 23 is not happening. I hope LCA 24 can proceed, and that there are some people out there somewhere now in the early stages of working out how they'd run one - though I realise time is getting short for that. I am pleased someone stepped up and volunteered to run an LCA-lookalike. And that's what I consider OE to be. Yet another conference bankrolled and supported by LA - not LCA but modelled on it so those of us who enjoy LCA don't miss out entirely. I don't see how supporting yet another open source conference changes the direction of LA - it's what LA has been doing "forever". Will OE "replace" LCA? I don't know, my crystal ball isn't working. It depends on what the community actively supports. Perhaps 2024 will see a viable proposal for an LCA, and not for another OE. Or perhaps for another OE and not LCA. Or perhaps proposals for both. The fact that at least some of the organisers of OE happen to be LA council members is in one way coincidence. In another it's not - those who run for council are clearly more willing and able to help our community than others, so it's not surprising they step up when no one else does. My thanks to those people. I look forward to reading what concrete actions could be taken to address people's concerns. Though I would not be in favour of cancelling OE. ;-) Cheers, Anne. On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 at 09:43, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus < linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > No offence to the people who work hard and do the work of running the LA. > However it appears to me they have gone a direction some members do not > approve and have taken the reigns and pushed the organisation in a > particular direction. > See notes below. > > > On 17 Oct 2022, at 12:39 am, Joel Addison wrote: > > ? > > On 16 Oct 2022, at 22:07, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus < > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au> wrote: > > Let me see if I can provide the timeline and point out why some people may > be a little upset with the lack of communication from Linux Australia (LA), > the lack of a Linux Conference Australia (LCA) and the new EverythingOpen > (EO) conference. > While I have looked at the LA mail list archive from December 2021 to now > to ensure a full grasp and also so that I am not forgetting something I may > have dismissed in haste there is no guarantee provided. You can check the > list archive yourself. > > On June 12th there was an email asking about what is happening with LCA > 2023. It was advised that the ?LA council have been discussing this over > the past few months?. They?ll LA council would have an announcement in the > next few weeks. > > Nothing else material except for the comment by Steven Ellis on June 13 > that he hoped ?something is going on elsewhere we don't know about.? Yet > nothing is said. > > Again LA was asked between July 26-30th about LCA for 2023. > After a brief reply and a pithy response commenting about ?so many > dedicated volunteers helping? and after advising to ?submit patches? there > was a retort that this has been requested for at least a month and it was > noted that there was no request for assistance and a bit more discussion > without any information. > > I must note that there was a few emails regarding the time and effort > needed to put on an LCA that people may find enlightening. (See Paul > Wayper on June 13 and Kathy Reid on July 30th.) > > I might also note that at this time there have been no calls for an LCA > 2024 so far. > > August 3rd we got an update that it was close to resolved and start > sounding out for speakers. > > September 30th - Rip/Vale LCA email starts this type of discussion. > > I am happy to be proven wrong but I can see no official update on LCA > provided. After the RIP/Vale email then an announcement about EO was > posted. > > It has since been said that the unacceptable bid (if it may be called > that) was advised. However without access to the committee meeting minutes > it is difficult to see what happened. (I might note that the Constitution > allows for asking for these under section 40(1)(a), but don?t take my word > on it - read it yourself) > > So when some members state there is a lack of transparency, it is hard to > disagree. > This is because there were multiple requests for information and despite > assurances to the contrary nothing was provided, at least publicly. I > certainly can not point to any communication despite others having multiple > attempts at asking what is happening. > There was no further requests for help or for people to put a conference > on, nor does there appear to be advice that an alternative was being > investigated by the council. > > What are the members supposed to think? > We are told we don?t step up and we need to be grateful for online > conferences despite the fact that some people want to go back to F2F > conferences, to the dismay of others. > > So it appears either we (the members) were forgotten, lied to or misled > that information would be forthcoming, or something else happened. The > question is what happened? > > So why are people upset? > Because what could be perceived as a very similar conference, sponsored by > LA (whatever that means - could one assume financial assistance?) that has > some similar categories to the LCA miniconfs and potentially taking the > place of the LCA. > The website specifically says ?Linux Australia has decided to run this > event to provide a space for a cross-section of the open technologies > communities to come together in person.? > It also says ?The presentations cover a broad range of subject areas, > including Linux, open source software, open hardware, open data, open > government, open GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums), to name > a few.? > > I?m sorry but it looks darn similar. It even states it uses the LA code > of conduct with ?All attendees of Everything Open 2023 agree to be bound by > the Linux Australia Code of Conduct.? > > When was it decided that LCA would be dropped in favour of EO? > Is there a team that has decided they don?t want to do LCA but still want > the same thing so they made EO? > I?m very confused by this conference. > So is this LCA2023 by another name? > > If not, why not? > > And why has there been no call for 2024? > > Just my 2c and an attempt at timeline and sorting out. > > Regards, > Marcus Herstik > > > > Linux Australia has decided to hold Everything Open in 2023. As you have > seen, there is much overlap, because it is the natural evolution of what we > have seen with linux.conf.au. > > > So basically it is LCA by another name. > > Everything Open will still cover everything we have seen at LCA, something > I think you've picked up on given the large overlap with announcement and > website content. It is designed to be inclusive to all members of the free > and open source technologies communities, giving people from all of > the areas that Linux Australia represents an avenue to come together to > share knowledge. There will still be other conferences auspiced by Linux > Australia in 2023 and beyond, focusing on specific communities, e.g. PyCon > AU, DrupalSouth, WordCamps, etc. > > > But no LCA. Got it. > > The 3 day duration of EO2023 is the same as the past two online > conferences, given it is the first event in a few years with an in person > component, > > > Except for the one that was submitted but rejected. > > and that there is still uncertainty around what might be going on in > the world, how many people are able and willing to travel, etc. > > > Ok. So what? Why was the 2022 bid not suggested earlier to consider moving > to 2023? > > > There is a longer overview on the base website: > https://everythingopen.au/news/introducing-everything-open/ > We will also have more to say as we go - we have only done the first > announcement so far. > > > From this page ? It is with all of this in mind that Linux Australia has > decided to organise Everything Open 2023, a new conference that embraces > all facets of open technology?. > > Congratulations - it seems you have declared this the new LCA. > Who made this decision? > Who is this group that have organised EO? > > As is usual, the Call for Volunteers will go out a bit later on. Getting > ahead of the announcement, we are looking at opening this in November. Feel > free to mark your calendar to look out for this. > > All subcommittees and events that are auspiced by Linux Australia are > required to have a Code of Conduct in place. Linux Australia has a Code of > Conduct, and this is the one that most end up adopting. Given Everything > Open is auspiced by Linux Australia, it shouldn't be a surprised that the > Code of Conduct is shared. > > As for 2024, Council has been occupied with getting the 2023 conference > announced, because we thought it was more important to get 2023 sorted > before looking to future years. Of course we haven't forgotten that we also > need to get the ball rolling for 2024 and beyond, and there will be further > details sent out once they are ready. > > Regards, > > Joel Addison > > > So it seems council made a specific and direct decision to create a > conference different but similar to LCA. > > Can I ask why this decision was made? > Please also answer the in line questions. > > > Regards, > Marcus Herstik > > M: 0405-569-466 > A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -- Coherent Digital Suite 9, 1176 Nepean Hwy Cheltenham Vic 3192 Phone: 03 9452 6968 Web: https://www.coherentdigital.com.au/ Email: info at coherentdigital.com.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mattcen at mattcen.com Mon Oct 17 17:56:48 2022 From: mattcen at mattcen.com (Matt Cengia) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 17:56:48 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: References: <09EA6128-A82F-4D91-BE5C-66AA3B70E953@addison.net.au> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 17, 2022, at 09:42, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: > From this page ? It is with all of this in mind that Linux Australia has decided to organise Everything Open 2023, a new conference that embraces all facets of open technology?. > > Congratulations - it seems you have declared this the new LCA. > Who made this decision? LA Council, the people we elected to make such decisions. Incidentally, you mention the LA council minutes. It looks like they're a little behind publishing them, but this proposal was initially discussed in April, as shown in these minutes (which I do acknowledge were published several months later). > Who is this group that have organised EO? The team listed at https://2023.everythingopen.au/about/ -- Matt Cengia (pronouns: they/them/theirs ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marcus at herstik.com Mon Oct 17 22:56:00 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 21:56:00 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: References: <09EA6128-A82F-4D91-BE5C-66AA3B70E953@addison.net.au> Message-ID: <77ac4c723d06efd30ee875ce698c2c74@herstik.com> Hi Anne, That is a great question and one I am considering. But let me ask this - How can 5 of 7 members run a conference under the "auspices" of Linux Australia and not call it the Linux Australia Conference? They have set up a complete hub and spoke system for conferences, eerily similar to LCA and yet it is not the LCA? So far we have the President, Vice-President, Secretary and 2 non-exec council members organising the EO conference. In fact there are only 2 members of the team not part of council, and one is ex-council. That's rather suspicious and there is definitely be a conflict of interest or a change in direction of the LCA that has "parted ways with the community". There are also questions regarding the IP (Intellectual Property) and the duty of care they have to the organisation and its assets - being the brand and reputation of the LCA. Let me take a page out of the LA Councils book and say that I will advise you in the next few weeks (haha). Truly I will have more in about 2 or 3 weeks. What may be best is to also ask - What do other members want and think? I've been very vocal so I am happy to take any suggestions (publicly or privately) before I put forward too much. To that end I have created a questionnaire to help determine what could be done. It will be active for about 2 weeks and will take about 15-20 minutes but much is optional. See it here https://bit.ly/3eBse4t Members can also email me directly instead if they want. Note - all information will be destroyed once the next AGM occurs and the anonymised results will be provided to council. Why can you trust me? I am an academic at Southern Cross University (amongst other things) and have developed it so that it should pass ethics approval if I was to put it forward for a "real" study. It wouldn't pass statistical analysis for a journal but I'm looking for sentiment, not repeatability. I can provide more reasons why you should trust me if you ask privately or you can wait for the next AGM and request for nominations as I intend to run. ####### Some things to consider before or instead of doing the questionnaire. ####### Meeting Minutes =============== I must note that the Linux.org.au news section, where meeting minutes have been posted, has not been updated with recent minutes. I can see there has been a lot of work on our behalf early in the year and I am appreciative of this, especially as they are (were?) meeting every 2 (two) weeks. It was last updated on 28th August 2022 with some of this years council meeting minutes, being the first 6 from the 2nd February 2022 to 27th April 2022. Note - the meeting on 27th April 2022 (the last one uploaded) mentions "Open Source AU conference conceptual planning kickoff". This is the only mention and nothing updated since. It appears this is where the issue is starting, however it is not called "Everything Open". October 2021 to Jan 2022's minutes were uploaded on the 14/15 Jan 2022. Feb 2021 to October 2021 minutes were batch uploaded on October 3rd 2021. This is the Linux Council that took over in Jan/Feb 2021. Prior to this meeting minutes were published shortly after the meeting. Suggestions to procedures ========================= So as you have requested I provide some concrete suggestions here goes: I'm not necessarily in favour of cancelling EO. It does appear to me to be a little suspicious that a group that run Linux Australia on behalf of it's members (the LA Council) appear, by your words and by simple analysis, to be also running a conference that is specifically NOT the LCA. So this is what needs to be addressed. Therefore I think - 1) the council should announce an AGM for very soon. In fact the process of organising should start now and do it ASAP. 2) the council members need to declare their affiliation/involvement with the new conference. That may be redundant as we know that 5 of 7 are organising it. 3) the council need to explain how this conference is so different to LCA and could not be done under the banner of LCA. Otherwise they are in the envious position of violating their duty to the organisation as the IP of the LCA has strong recognition and they may have wilfully or negligently destroying the IP with another similar conference. 4) the council must release the meeting minutes where this new conference was decided to be run. 5) the council need to provide the meeting minutes where the previous bids have been decided. This may be redundant now but more information needed. 6) the council (or new council assuming point 1 is done in a short time) needs to ensure that processes exist so that in future this kind of thing does not happen. How? a) Firstly the council can not CREATE a conference on their own behalf without advising the members. b) Secondly, meeting minutes must be uploaded within 7 days of the meeting that has confirmed previous meeting minutes. (In other words after every meeting the previous meetings minutes are published.) c) Thirdly, conflicts of interest need to be advised to the council and if more than 2 members (30%) have an interest in any item then those members must either abstain from voting and deliberations. Alternatively the item can be postponed until the members are not part of the item to be discussed or not part of the LA Council. (This is because 5 people is a quorum and therefore more than 2 can pass resolutions.) (d) Item c does not become an issue for Linux Conference Australia as the official event of Linux Australia. If the official event is to change it must be voted for by the members. How does that sound Anne? Concrete enough for you and the Council? For Matt - they are supposed to work on our behalf. I believe I have provided a response but happy to revisit if you can point something else out. ####### Remember - Questionnaire at https://bit.ly/3eBse4t Members can also email me directly instead. ##### I have also been informed privately by one member that they are unable to post... but I am unable to confirm this. If true this is a worrying development. It may just be an issue with subscription not matching the email being posted from, but they claim to have checked that. Let me state that my look at the minutes has shown the hard work the council have completed and I am disappointed that a minor change would have stopped all this. Regards, Marcus On 2022-10-17 10:16, Anne wrote: > Hi Marcus > > I understand you're unhappy about the way OE was announced. I can't see > how continually questioning the people who are bankrolling OE is going > to achieve anything. What's happened has happened, and can't be undone > or changed. Given the people concerned are volunteers, with a day job > and a life to fit in as well, it's not surprising some members consider > communication lacking. Corporates who pay people to communicate with > the public full time suffer from that problem too. > > Perhaps you could explain what you'd like to see happen next? What > actions can be taken to address your concerns? > > That question applies to anyone else who is also unhappy. Rather than > obsess about the past, let's work out how to fix this and move on. > > Personally, I am sad that LCA 23 is not happening. I hope LCA 24 can > proceed, and that there are some people out there somewhere now in the > early stages of working out how they'd run one - though I realise time > is getting short for that. > > I am pleased someone stepped up and volunteered to run an > LCA-lookalike. And that's what I consider OE to be. Yet another > conference bankrolled and supported by LA - not LCA but modelled on it > so those of us who enjoy LCA don't miss out entirely. I don't see how > supporting yet another open source conference changes the direction of > LA - it's what LA has been doing "forever". Will OE "replace" LCA? I > don't know, my crystal ball isn't working. It depends on what the > community actively supports. Perhaps 2024 will see a viable proposal > for an LCA, and not for another OE. Or perhaps for another OE and not > LCA. Or perhaps proposals for both. > > The fact that at least some of the organisers of OE happen to be LA > council members is in one way coincidence. In another it's not - those > who run for council are clearly more willing and able to help our > community than others, so it's not surprising they step up when no one > else does. My thanks to those people. > > I look forward to reading what concrete actions could be taken to > address people's concerns. Though I would not be in favour of > cancelling OE. ;-) > > Cheers, > Anne. > > On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 at 09:43, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus > wrote: > > No offence to the people who work hard and do the work of running the > LA. > However it appears to me they have gone a direction some members do not > approve and have taken the reigns and pushed the organisation in a > particular direction. > See notes below. > > On 17 Oct 2022, at 12:39 am, Joel Addison wrote: > > On 16 Oct 2022, at 22:07, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus > wrote: > > Let me see if I can provide the timeline and point out why some people > may be a little upset with the lack of communication from Linux > Australia (LA), the lack of a Linux Conference Australia (LCA) and the > new EverythingOpen (EO) conference. > While I have looked at the LA mail list archive from December 2021 to > now to ensure a full grasp and also so that I am not forgetting > something I may have dismissed in haste there is no guarantee provided. > You can check the list archive yourself. > > On June 12th there was an email asking about what is happening with LCA > 2023. It was advised that the "LA council have been discussing this > over the past few months". They'll LA council would have an > announcement in the next few weeks. > > Nothing else material except for the comment by Steven Ellis on June 13 > that he hoped "something is going on elsewhere we don't know about." > Yet nothing is said. > > Again LA was asked between July 26-30th about LCA for 2023. > After a brief reply and a pithy response commenting about "so many > dedicated volunteers helping" and after advising to "submit patches" > there was a retort that this has been requested for at least a month > and it was noted that there was no request for assistance and a bit > more discussion without any information. > > I must note that there was a few emails regarding the time and effort > needed to put on an LCA that people may find enlightening. (See Paul > Wayper on June 13 and Kathy Reid on July 30th.) > > I might also note that at this time there have been no calls for an LCA > 2024 so far. > > August 3rd we got an update that it was close to resolved and start > sounding out for speakers. > > September 30th - Rip/Vale LCA email starts this type of discussion. > > I am happy to be proven wrong but I can see no official update on LCA > provided. After the RIP/Vale email then an announcement about EO was > posted. > > It has since been said that the unacceptable bid (if it may be called > that) was advised. However without access to the committee meeting > minutes it is difficult to see what happened. (I might note that the > Constitution allows for asking for these under section 40(1)(a), but > don't take my word on it - read it yourself) > > So when some members state there is a lack of transparency, it is hard > to disagree. > This is because there were multiple requests for information and > despite assurances to the contrary nothing was provided, at least > publicly. I certainly can not point to any communication despite others > having multiple attempts at asking what is happening. > There was no further requests for help or for people to put a > conference on, nor does there appear to be advice that an alternative > was being investigated by the council. > > What are the members supposed to think? > We are told we don't step up and we need to be grateful for online > conferences despite the fact that some people want to go back to F2F > conferences, to the dismay of others. > > So it appears either we (the members) were forgotten, lied to or misled > that information would be forthcoming, or something else happened. The > question is what happened? > > So why are people upset? > Because what could be perceived as a very similar conference, sponsored > by LA (whatever that means - could one assume financial assistance?) > that has some similar categories to the LCA miniconfs and potentially > taking the place of the LCA. > The website specifically says "Linux Australia has decided to run this > event to provide a space for a cross-section of the open technologies > communities to come together in person." > It also says "The presentations cover a broad range of subject areas, > including Linux, open source software, open hardware, open data, open > government, open GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums), to > name a few." > > I'm sorry but it looks darn similar. It even states it uses the LA > code of conduct with "All attendees of Everything Open 2023 agree to be > bound by the Linux Australia Code of Conduct." > > When was it decided that LCA would be dropped in favour of EO? > Is there a team that has decided they don't want to do LCA but still > want the same thing so they made EO? > I'm very confused by this conference. > So is this LCA2023 by another name? > > If not, why not? > > And why has there been no call for 2024? > > Just my 2c and an attempt at timeline and sorting out. > Regards, > Marcus Herstik > > Linux Australia has decided to hold Everything Open in 2023. As you > have seen, there is much overlap, because it is the natural evolution > of what we have seen with linux.conf.au. So basically it is LCA by another name. > Everything Open will still cover everything we have seen at LCA, > something I think you've picked up on given the large overlap with > announcement and website content. It is designed to be inclusive to all > members of the free and open source technologies communities, giving > people from all of the areas that Linux Australia represents an avenue > to come together to share knowledge. There will still be other > conferences auspiced by Linux Australia in 2023 and beyond, focusing on > specific communities, e.g. PyCon AU, DrupalSouth, WordCamps, etc. But no LCA. Got it. > The 3 day duration of EO2023 is the same as the past two online > conferences, given it is the first event in a few years with an in > person component, Except for the one that was submitted but rejected. > and that there is still uncertainty around what might be going on in > the world, how many people are able and willing to travel, etc. Ok. So what? Why was the 2022 bid not suggested earlier to consider moving to 2023? > There is a longer overview on the base website: > https://everythingopen.au/news/introducing-everything-open/ > We will also have more to say as we go - we have only done the first > announcement so far. From this page " It is with all of this in mind that Linux Australia has decided to organise Everything Open 2023, a new conference that embraces all facets of open technology". Congratulations - it seems you have declared this the new LCA. Who made this decision? Who is this group that have organised EO? > As is usual, the Call for Volunteers will go out a bit later on. > Getting ahead of the announcement, we are looking at opening this in > November. Feel free to mark your calendar to look out for this. > > All subcommittees and events that are auspiced by Linux Australia are > required to have a Code of Conduct in place. Linux Australia has a Code > of Conduct, and this is the one that most end up adopting. Given > Everything Open is auspiced by Linux Australia, it shouldn't be a > surprised that the Code of Conduct is shared. > > As for 2024, Council has been occupied with getting the 2023 conference > announced, because we thought it was more important to get 2023 sorted > before looking to future years. Of course we haven't forgotten that we > also need to get the ball rolling for 2024 and beyond, and there will > be further details sent out once they are ready. > > Regards, > > Joel Addison So it seems council made a specific and direct decision to create a conference different but similar to LCA. Can I ask why this decision was made? Please also answer the in line questions. Regards, Marcus Herstik M: 0405-569-466 A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 _______________________________________________ linux-aus mailing list linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -- Coherent Digital Suite 9, 1176 Nepean Hwy Cheltenham Vic 3192 Phone: 03 9452 6968 Web: https://www.coherentdigital.com.au/ Email: info at coherentdigital.com.au From kathy at kathyreid.id.au Tue Oct 18 00:50:03 2022 From: kathy at kathyreid.id.au (Kathy Reid) Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 00:50:03 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: <77ac4c723d06efd30ee875ce698c2c74@herstik.com> References: <09EA6128-A82F-4D91-BE5C-66AA3B70E953@addison.net.au> <77ac4c723d06efd30ee875ce698c2c74@herstik.com> Message-ID: <10302b44-a8bd-5fec-7c5e-754f72830d44@kathyreid.id.au> Marcus, I wish to address some of your points constitutionally, as a former President of Linux Australia, and because I feel that the current Council may be hesitant to respond given the the current tenor of this list. I want to be clear I am not speaking *for* Council, but I have some experience which may be of value here. >? 1) the council should announce an AGM for very soon. In fact the process of organising should start now and do it ASAP. AGMs are covered in Section 4, S(24-32) of the LA Constitution [1]. There are timelines around the notice that needs to be provided to members, and the key constitutional deadline is that the AGM must be held within 6 months of the end of financial year (which is 30 September 2022), so by end of March 2023. As per this thread [2] there is a huge amount of work that Council must complete before an AGM can be held. I don't want to speak for Council, however requesting that this volume of work be brought forward by three months (the AGM is usually in January), is unlikely to be feasible. Everyone on Council is a volunteer, and five of those volunteers - as you outline - are also committed to running a large conference in under 6 months' time. When we make requests of volunteers, let's be mindful of the actual effort that's involved in that request. > 2) the council members need to declare their affiliation/involvement with the new conference. That may be redundant as we know that 5 of 7 are organising it. I believe there is already information in the public domain, such as Everything Open's Team that already clarifies this [3]. > 3) the council need to explain how this conference is so different to LCA and could not be done under the banner of LCA. Otherwise they are in the envious position of violating their duty to the organisation as the IP of the LCA has strong recognition and they may have wilfully or negligently destroying the IP with another similar conference. Constitutionally, they do not. The Members of Linux Australia, Inc., elect the Council (the "committee" in the Constitution) to act in the best interests of the organisation. The Constitution S(13) outlines the powers of the committee, verbatim: 13. Powers of the committee Subject to the Act, the Regulation and this constitution and to any resolution passed by the association in general meeting, the committee: (a) is to control and manage the affairs of the association, and (b) may exercise all such functions as may be exercised by the association, other than those functions that are required by this constitution to be exercised by a general meeting of members of the association, and (c) has power to perform all such acts and do all such things as appear to the committee to be necessary or desirable for the proper management of the affairs of the association. I am not a lawyer, and not an IP lawyer. However, from what I can tell, the IP inherent within linux.conf.au has *not* been damaged in any way. It is not a registered trademark, it has no patents applied, and the internal processes that allow the conference to be well run are (as I understand), documented internally. There is a strong counter-claim here: Linux Australia's events provide the organisation's ongoing revenue. This is one of the reasons LA carries a large cash reserve ($800k off the top of my head, but I'd have to dig into the Annual Reports to be certain) - because if an event fails, LA needs to be able to cover the cost of that event failing. Were the Council to *not* run an event *then* they would be endangering the organisation - and not running its affairs properly - because they would not be undertaking activities that protect its financial future. There were no bids received for LCA2023 - which (alongside PyCon AU, which is not running in 2022) - is a key revenue generation activity of the organisation. > 4) the council must release the meeting minutes where this new conference was decided to be run. S(16) of the Constitution requires the Secretary to take minutes of all Council meetings, and the AGM. There aren't timelines specified in the Constitution around when these are made available. I know historically that it's (another) chunk of work to transfer the minutes from the platform they're taken in, to the website, and this is usually done in preparation for the AGM so that the minutes are completed by the AGM. Again, we're asking the volunteer Council to bring forward this piece of work. > 5) the council need to provide the meeting minutes where the previous bids have been decided. This may be redundant now but more information needed. I believe this has already been addressed - your request for more information is not a constitutional issue, but an informational one. > 6) the council (or new council assuming point 1 is done in a short time) needs to ensure that processes exist so that in future this kind of thing does not happen. How? a) Firstly the council can not CREATE a conference on their own behalf without advising the members. b) Secondly, meeting minutes must be uploaded within 7 days of the meeting that has confirmed previous meeting minutes. (In other words after every meeting the previous meetings minutes are published.) c) Thirdly, conflicts of interest need to be advised to the council and if more than 2 members (30%) have an interest in any item then those members must either abstain from voting and deliberations. Alternatively the item can be postponed until the members are not part of the item to be discussed or not part of the LA Council. (This is because 5 people is a quorum and therefore more than 2 can pass resolutions.) (d) Item c does not become an issue for Linux Conference Australia as the official event of Linux Australia. If the official event is to change it must be voted for by the members. This isn't a Constitutional issue - the Council is empowered to make decisions to manage the affairs of the organisation - and they have decided to form a new Subcommittee (which is governed by a process [4]) through which to arrange and execute an event under Linux Australia's auspices. The Council can, constitutionally, take this action. They don't, constitutionally, need to consult with Members to change the events that are auspiced by Linux Australia. What Council *do* need to do, constitutionally, is act in the best interests of the organisation - such as by ensuring a viable revenue stream. Now, I wish to turn attention to your proposed questionnaire and its proposed ethical basis and statistical validity. Firstly, the research questions and epistemology upon which the questionnaire is based - its construct - is not outlined or not clear. It appears to be politically motivated to support a political position you've clearly outlined elsewhere on the list, and therefore is neutrality as an instrument is ... questionable. If you're seeking to gather views of the community on this issue, then by all means solicit them via email or other methods, but the questionnaire as outlined lacks validity. To its ethical basis, if it were to be brought before a Human Ethics Committee for consideration, they would likely ask questions like "what is the potential for harm in promoting or undertaking this survey?". You may wish to consider the psychological harms that proposing this survey may have for the people involved on Council or the Everything Open conference - who are giving up their free time in service of this organisation. That alone would be a red flag. Are there more effective ways you could be approaching the changes you wish to see happen here? Kathy Reid [1] https://linux.org.au/about-us/constitution/ [2] https://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/2022-October/024085.html [3] https://2023.everythingopen.au/about/ [4] https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/blob/master/subcommittee_policy_v3.md -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marcus at herstik.com Tue Oct 18 18:00:39 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 17:00:39 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: <10302b44-a8bd-5fec-7c5e-754f72830d44@kathyreid.id.au> References: <10302b44-a8bd-5fec-7c5e-754f72830d44@kathyreid.id.au> Message-ID: Hi Kathy, Thank you for your response. The fact that the council is a volunteer group does not make them immune to scrutiny or absolve them of responsibilities under the Constitution or the Act I will get back to you (and all the members on this list) after I have received more information. ####### Remember - Questionnaire at https://bit.ly/3eBse4t Members can also email me directly instead. ##### Regards, Marcus Herstik M: 0405-569-466 A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 > On 17 Oct 2022, at 11:50 pm, Kathy Reid wrote: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kathy at kathyreid.id.au Tue Oct 18 21:14:31 2022 From: kathy at kathyreid.id.au (Kathy Reid) Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 21:14:31 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: <70428BA9-CE4C-4341-911A-9D483EDB28CC@herstik.com> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kathy at kathyreid.id.au Tue Oct 18 21:44:39 2022 From: kathy at kathyreid.id.au (Kathy Reid) Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 21:44:39 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: <355BB0AB-BB13-42AB-996B-A9321AA89427@herstik.com> References: <355BB0AB-BB13-42AB-996B-A9321AA89427@herstik.com> Message-ID: <2c3139c1-fd01-e430-096f-96d946267af2@kathyreid.id.au> Sure do. You're all about scrutiny and transparency, right? I didn't think you'd mind. Kathy On 18/10/2022 9:26 pm, Marcus Herstik wrote: > You realise you just went from private to public right? > >> >> On 18 Oct 2022, at 8:15 pm, Kathy Reid wrote: >> >> ? >> Hi Marcus, >> >> I can only comment on my time in Council so things may have changed, >> however there is usually a Council "face to face" - pandemic >> permitting - in March or April following the AGM, where new Council >> members are briefed on their responsibilities and strategic direction >> is discussed. From memory there is a Council Induction doc floating >> around, but don't hold me to that . >> >> We investigated in about 2017 - I think - of having Council Members >> go through the AICD course, but it's about $11k per person and we - >> it would have been me responsible at the time - decided it wasn't >> financially feasible - largely because we could invest that amount in >> someone who might only be on Council for a year and then move on. >> Should we be investing profits in one or two people rather than the >> community? There are arguments on both sides. >> >> In my view, and this is my view only, the AICD course would be a wise >> investment for someone who has given several years' service to the >> organisation and indicates they would give several more. But it's a >> large expenditure - perhaps one for the Grants budget. >> >> Additionally, the Council Members each have Position Descriptions >> outlining their roles on GitHub, linked previously. >> >> Council Members are voluntary - and so their capacities and >> capabilities vary - and so often it's a balancing act for Council of >> who does what. There is always more LA would like to do than we have >> capacity to do. In terms of growing capability (life tends to >> constrain capacity), we find LA Council is a rich training ground, >> where Council members tackle complex, contentious and challenging >> problems. >> >> The next question that is often asked at this juncture is "why don't >> you get paid support?". It's been discussed several times - getting >> someone high calibre on what we could afford to pay would be >> challenging, plus managing staff or contractors comes with a large >> overhead - which Council is actually trying to reduce. For example, a >> 0.2 FTE Exec Officer role would probably set LA back about $20-$25k a >> year - that's two thirds of the Grants budget. Would that role show a >> positive return on investment higher than $25k or would it just "help >> Council"? Not sure, and it's not for me to speculate as to Council's >> current position. That might be a great investment. But the >> discussion has been had several times. >> >> There's a fantastic slide Sae Ra and Julien showed at their LA talk >> earlier in the year that outlined all the things LA has to govern and >> manage - does anyone have it to hand? >> >> Regards, >> Kathy >> >> >> >> >> >> On 18 Oct 2022 20:27, Marcus Herstik wrote: >> >> Hi Kathy, >> As an ex-council member can is ask what kind of governance >> training council members go through? >> In previous organisations I have been involved with most have >> some training they put people through. >> >> Regards, >> Marcus Herstik >> >> M: 0405-569-466 >> A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 >> >> On 18 Oct 2022, at 6:40 pm, Kathy Reid >> wrote: >> >> ? >> None of what I wrote indicates that they are absolved of >> responsibilities, Marcus, however I was clarifying exactly >> what responsibilities they *do* have. >> >> Kathy >> >> On 18 Oct 2022 18:00, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus >> wrote: >> >> Hi Kathy, >> Thank you for your response. >> >> The fact that the council is a volunteer group does not >> make them immune to scrutiny or absolve them of >> responsibilities under the Constitution or the Act >> >> I will get back to you (and all the members on this list) >> after I have received more information. >> >> ####### >> Remember - Questionnaire at https://bit.ly/3eBse4t >> Members can also email me directly instead. >> ##### >> >> Regards, >> Marcus Herstik >> >> M: 0405-569-466 >> A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 >> >> On 17 Oct 2022, at 11:50 pm, Kathy Reid >> wrote: >> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marcus at herstik.com Tue Oct 18 22:47:06 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 21:47:06 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: <2c3139c1-fd01-e430-096f-96d946267af2@kathyreid.id.au> References: <2c3139c1-fd01-e430-096f-96d946267af2@kathyreid.id.au> Message-ID: While I don?t mind, you were the one who messaged me privately, rather than the mail list. So I did as you did, as a courtesy. Seems rather manipulative to swap from private to public like that. As stated, I am waiting for some information, and you have also provided some, so thank you for that. I will appraise you, Anne and the list once I received and processed it. Regards, Marcus > > On 18 Oct 2022, at 8:45 pm, Kathy Reid wrote: > ? > Sure do. You're all about scrutiny and transparency, right? I didn't think you'd mind. > > Kathy > > On 18/10/2022 9:26 pm, Marcus Herstik wrote: >> You realise you just went from private to public right? >> >>> >>> On 18 Oct 2022, at 8:15 pm, Kathy Reid wrote: >>> ? >>> Hi Marcus, >>> >>> I can only comment on my time in Council so things may have changed, however there is usually a Council "face to face" - pandemic permitting - in March or April following the AGM, where new Council members are briefed on their responsibilities and strategic direction is discussed. From memory there is a Council Induction doc floating around, but don't hold me to that . >>> >>> We investigated in about 2017 - I think - of having Council Members go through the AICD course, but it's about $11k per person and we - it would have been me responsible at the time - decided it wasn't financially feasible - largely because we could invest that amount in someone who might only be on Council for a year and then move on. Should we be investing profits in one or two people rather than the community? There are arguments on both sides. >>> >>> In my view, and this is my view only, the AICD course would be a wise investment for someone who has given several years' service to the organisation and indicates they would give several more. But it's a large expenditure - perhaps one for the Grants budget. >>> >>> Additionally, the Council Members each have Position Descriptions outlining their roles on GitHub, linked previously. >>> >>> Council Members are voluntary - and so their capacities and capabilities vary - and so often it's a balancing act for Council of who does what. There is always more LA would like to do than we have capacity to do. In terms of growing capability (life tends to constrain capacity), we find LA Council is a rich training ground, where Council members tackle complex, contentious and challenging problems. >>> >>> The next question that is often asked at this juncture is "why don't you get paid support?". It's been discussed several times - getting someone high calibre on what we could afford to pay would be challenging, plus managing staff or contractors comes with a large overhead - which Council is actually trying to reduce. For example, a 0.2 FTE Exec Officer role would probably set LA back about $20-$25k a year - that's two thirds of the Grants budget. Would that role show a positive return on investment higher than $25k or would it just "help Council"? Not sure, and it's not for me to speculate as to Council's current position. That might be a great investment. But the discussion has been had several times. >>> >>> There's a fantastic slide Sae Ra and Julien showed at their LA talk earlier in the year that outlined all the things LA has to govern and manage - does anyone have it to hand? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Kathy >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 18 Oct 2022 20:27, Marcus Herstik wrote: >>> Hi Kathy, >>> As an ex-council member can is ask what kind of governance training council members go through? >>> In previous organisations I have been involved with most have some training they put people through. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Marcus Herstik >>> >>> M: 0405-569-466 >>> A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 >>> >>> On 18 Oct 2022, at 6:40 pm, Kathy Reid wrote: >>> >>> ? >>> None of what I wrote indicates that they are absolved of responsibilities, Marcus, however I was clarifying exactly what responsibilities they *do* have. >>> >>> Kathy >>> >>> On 18 Oct 2022 18:00, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: >>> Hi Kathy, >>> Thank you for your response. >>> >>> The fact that the council is a volunteer group does not make them immune to scrutiny or absolve them of responsibilities under the Constitution or the Act >>> >>> I will get back to you (and all the members on this list) after I have received more information. >>> >>> ####### >>> Remember - Questionnaire at https://bit.ly/3eBse4t >>> Members can also email me directly instead. >>> ##### >>> >>> Regards, >>> Marcus Herstik >>> >>> M: 0405-569-466 >>> A: P.O. Box 2443, Burleigh Waters, QLD, 4220 >>> >>> On 17 Oct 2022, at 11:50 pm, Kathy Reid wrote: >>> >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From quozl at laptop.org Wed Oct 19 06:35:07 2022 From: quozl at laptop.org (James Cameron) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 06:35:07 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Communication and conferences. In-Reply-To: References: <70428BA9-CE4C-4341-911A-9D483EDB28CC@herstik.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 09:14:31PM +1100, Kathy Reid via linux-aus wrote: > We investigated in about 2017 - I think - of having Council Members > go through the AICD course, but it's about $11k per person [...] I was on two boards around the same time. A subcommittee of one board having learned the pricing hired a trainer, and were able to get it done for a reasonable price, though I never paid attention enough to hear what the price was. Chris Bertinshaw was our trainer. It was good. https://bertinshaw.com.au/ From andrew at sericyb.com.au Wed Oct 19 14:31:54 2022 From: andrew at sericyb.com.au (Andrew Pam) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 14:31:54 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] [Announce] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 29/9/22 21:07, contact at everythingopen.au wrote: > Australasia's grassroots Free and Open Source technologies conference, > Everything Open, will be held in Melbourne, Australia from March 14-16 > 2023. I wonder if we could reach out to people in Open Source Agriculture? I seem to recall we've already had at least one talk on this topic at LCA. "Also similarly to computer software, where initially only a few users developed open source software like Linux, the market share of open source seeds is currently too small to be measured. But just like Linux, they fulfill more than a side role. They spur innovation and creativity, and make room for local and regional interests." Cheers, Andrew -- mailto:andrew at sericyb.com.au Andrew Pam https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings From jwoithe at just42.net Wed Oct 19 19:59:20 2022 From: jwoithe at just42.net (Jonathan Woithe) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 19:29:20 +1030 Subject: [Linux-aus] [Announce] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andrew On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 02:31:54PM +1100, Andrew Pam via linux-aus wrote: > On 29/9/22 21:07, contact at everythingopen.au wrote: > > Australasia's grassroots Free and Open Source technologies conference, > > Everything Open, will be held in Melbourne, Australia from March 14-16 > > 2023. > > I wonder if we could reach out to people in Open Source Agriculture? I seem > to recall we've already had at least one talk on this topic at LCA. That's a really good idea - thanks for the suggestion. While I can't recall the specifics, I do remember the talk to which you are referring to. There have also been a few small scale agriculture talks over the years. We'll add Agriculture to our list of potential topics. Regards jonathan From craige at mcwhirter.com.au Fri Oct 21 13:07:18 2022 From: craige at mcwhirter.com.au (Craige McWhirter) Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 12:07:18 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <6347C0A7.8080001@wirejunkie.com> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <6347C0A7.8080001@wirejunkie.com> Message-ID: <20221021020718.y7b7lh2rm3tjx7aq@dionach> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 18:39:19 +1100, Tim Serong via linux-aus wrote: > On 13/10/22 10:29, Craige McWhirter wrote: > > [...] > > This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow vessel for > > sponsors. > > Really Craige? REALLY? I honestly can't believe you'd even *think* LA > would be involved in something like that, let alone put it in print. Hey Tim :-) "Looks" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in my quote above. At the time of writing I had a single announcement and a website (that I went through) both of which showed no trace of community involvement you'd expect but here was conference that is LCA in format but uses a diferent name. > As for the rest of your comments, I'm pretty sure they're largely > addressed by Russell Stuart's subsequent email (thanks Russell, BTW). Yes, largely although not completely. Stuart's response was excellent. Thanks Stuart :-) As other commentators have mentioned, there are significant issues around transparency, process and other things. My current take is that some members of the council admirably stepped into the "no LCA" breach with a line of thought that looks a like "what if LCA but named OE?" The LA constitution has no mission statement because it's assumed by the community that we know what that mission is. I'll take these notes from the website: "facilitates internationally-renowned events including linux.conf.au - Australasia?s grassroots Free and Open Source Software Conference." "facilitates the organisation of linux.conf.au, a premier international Linux conference, in a different Australasian city each year." "undertakes to operate at all times in an open, transparent and democratic manner" https://linux.org.au/about-us/ That's pretty much the reason LA exists, it's the 1 job we have. Some of the council have technically fulfilled that assumed mission but called it something else. This feels pretty close to SGM territory to me. That the overlap between LCA and OE should have been addressed at the council level but wasn't is of concern to me. "This is LCA, just call it that". At the very least we should consider adopting a mission statement - as over the last 6 years or so it's become an increasingly obvious the membership and subsequent councils (including myself and councils I've served on) are not entirely clear on LA's purpose. That's why we find ourselves in this position. A mission statement will at least laser our focus in on whether we are "Linux Australia" or "Conference Australia". A suggested mission statement could read something like: "Linux Australia facilitates the internationally-renowned conference - linux.conf.au - Australasia?s premi?re grassroots Free and Open Source Software Conference in an open, transparent and democratic manner. Linux Australia also facilitates conferences that share the common values of Free and Open Source Software" Such a mission statement makes it clear what we do and what our priorities are: LCA first, others as a nice bi-product of LCA's success. It also makes it clear that "OE" should have been named LCA or rejected because it is LCA by another name and as such would represent a conflict of interest. -- Craige McWhirter Signal: +61 4685 91819 Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From info at petermoulding.com Sat Oct 22 11:32:03 2022 From: info at petermoulding.com (Info) Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2022 11:32:03 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <20221021020718.y7b7lh2rm3tjx7aq@dionach> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <6347C0A7.8080001@wirejunkie.com> <20221021020718.y7b7lh2rm3tjx7aq@dionach> Message-ID: <752f3068-7904-5c0e-efdc-e409a8892f8e@petermoulding.com> On 21/10/22 13:07, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 18:39:19 +1100, Tim Serong via linux-aus wrote: > At the very least we should consider adopting a mission statement - as over the Interesting idea. How would the membership, or interested members, have input to the mission statement? How would they vote on a form of the mission statement as ok, yes, lets use this one? My experience of mission statements is corporate ones with no input from staff, either no meaning or no actual rules to enforce anything, and mainly a marketing tool. They tend to be different from a constitution where there are rules to follow for implementing things and for changing the constitution. A mission statement could mention representing the non commercial people and activity in our geographic area and common interest. A large amount of our work on free stuff is paid by companies who benefit from the free stuff. Sponsorship could be from companies benefiting from free open instead of companies selling commercial stuff to the free open workers. Is there an international organisation representing organisations like LCA or neighbour groups with mission statements we could look at? Part of the mission could be to make donations to free open tax deductible. What else would you include in a mission statement? I would push governments to provide better remote access and to improve education in remote areas to cover use of technology. This would help LCA to deliver conference events as education for everyone. Peter From kathy at kathyreid.id.au Sat Oct 22 00:59:54 2022 From: kathy at kathyreid.id.au (Kathy Reid) Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2022 00:59:54 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <20221021020718.y7b7lh2rm3tjx7aq@dionach> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <6347C0A7.8080001@wirejunkie.com> <20221021020718.y7b7lh2rm3tjx7aq@dionach> Message-ID: <4d11b40b-26c0-ad39-4c9a-d15ef00ba18e@kathyreid.id.au> Hi Craige, I'd like to address your proposals from a constitutional perspective. I'm doing this to negate any perception that the membership is not correctly informed about the processes they have to take action - you can only make change if you're able to know the structures through which power is wielded. Moreover, the Council is now in the busiest period of their working year, and is dealing with a significant additional workload as a result of these discussions - so I'm doing what we as a community do best: bringing our multiple talents together to make a better whole. Clearly, I do not speak for Council - this information is coming from my experience previously with Council. 1. Proposing to include a mission statement in the Constitution Linux Australia Inc. is an Incorporated Association under the NSW Fair Trading Act. NSW Fair Trading provides a model constitution for Incorporated Associations [0]. This does not include a mission statement, although there is nothing to preclude a mission statement being included in the constitution. I would advise against it however, due to S(39) of the constitution of LA, which reads verbatim: 38. Change of name, objects and constitution An application to the Director-General for registration of a change in the association?s name, objects or constitution in accordance with section 10 of the Act is to be made by the public officer or a committee member. In practice, this means that if the Linux Australia Committee (Council) saw fit to update the organisation's mission or mission statement (say in response to changes in the external environment like a once in a hundred year pandemic), then the LA Council would have to apply to the Director General of Fair Trading NSW to be able to update the Constitution. This has been done before - for example to update our financial year to coincide with when the bulk of conferences happen to make it easier to audit the books and forecast future financials. So, doing this creates a dependency LA Council may not want. There's a separate thread here about the Fair Trading Model Constitution having being updated recently - and LA's existing constitution now having drifted somewhat from the Model constitution - which was updated last month - but I am confident this is on Council's radar. 2. Proposing a mission statement for the organisation that is codified separately to the constitution Alternatively, LA may wish to have a Mission Statement that is codified outside of the Constitution, to avoid the dependency outlined above. This is well within the remit of Council to enact (see S(13) for Powers of the Committee). We already have this in some form, such as the Linux Australia values, which I believe you're quoting from directly [1]. There is nothing required constitutionally for the LA Council to change the statement of values, mission statement etc. There is no requirement for the Council to consult the Membership on doing this, although in practice how they approach this is up to Council. 3. Assigning primacy to Linux Conference Australia in the mission statement, statement of values or other guiding principles of the organisation There is nothing constitutionally to stop the LA Council from assigning primacy to a particular event, purpose or activity in the guiding principles of the organisation. However, you may wish to consider whether LCA actually does have primacy in the way that Linux Australia currently operates. For example, in terms of gross revenue, LCA over the last two reporting periods accounted for about only a third of Linux Australia's profit. I've taken the liberty of visualising this in this quick and dirty spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZHfmUTpvxZJSYigyBTCtNlEhG0t7g9mtF5NxR7kapfg/edit?usp=sharing This may have changed given the pandemic - and will likely change with PyConAU, which is a significant revenue contribution, not running in 2022. But my point is valid - LCA does not have financial primacy. It's a significant event - absolutely - it's the largest single contributor to revenue. But it's far from the only one. Does this ascribe it primacy? I don't think so. LA was founded to auspice LCA, certainly. But over time, like with most organisations, it has adapted and diversified. Time and again history shows us that survival equates to adaptability. 4. Special General Meetings The constitutional arrangements for SGMs are outlined in S(25) of the constitution, which I am quoting verbatim here for clarity: 25. Special general meetings ? calling of (1) The committee may, whenever it thinks fit, convene a special general meeting of the association. (2) The committee must, on the requisition in writing of at least 5 per cent of the total number of members or 20 members, whichever number is fewer, convene a special general meeting of the association. (3) A requisition of members for a special general meeting: (a) must state the purpose or purposes of the meeting, and (b) must be signed by the members making the requisition, and (c) must be lodged with the secretary, and (d) may consist of several documents in a similar form, each signed by one or more of the members making the requisition. (4) If the committee fails to convene a special general meeting to be held within 1 month after that date on which a requisition of members for the meeting is lodged with the secretary, any one or more of the members who made the requisition may convene a special general meeting to be held not later than 3 months after that date. (5) A special general meeting convened by a member or members as referred to in subclause (4) must be convened as nearly as is practicable in the same manner as general meetings are convened by the committee. In practice, SGMs have been used to propose constitutional amendments. I don't know what Linux Australia's current membership # are, and the Secretary will be able to advise if requested, so that the 5% number can be calculated above. Based on previous membership numbers, the 20 members figure would definitely be the lesser number per S(25)(2). 5. Updating Membership details Marcus Herstik previously identified an issue with the Membership login to https://linux.org.au - thank you Marcus for identifying this. This has now been resolved (with many thanks to Neill Cox and Steve Walsh). If people wish to view their Membership status or Membership information, they can do so now on the website. Only current Members may vote in motions on an SGM or AGM. The voting module in CiviCRM on the Linux Australia website enforces this requirement - you have to log in to be able to vote in elections, and the elections module is also used to do voting on proposals (such as the previous renaming proposal). The Register of Members is dealt with in S(7) of the Constitution, and the Members module within CiviCRM on the website provides compliance with these requirements. Regards, Kathy Reid [0] https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/associations-and-co-operatives/associations/starting-an-association/model-constitution [1] https://linux.org.au/about-us/values/ [2] https://linux.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/annual-report-2022-combined-hires.pdf On 21/10/2022 1:07 pm, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 18:39:19 +1100, Tim Serong via linux-aus wrote: >> On 13/10/22 10:29, Craige McWhirter wrote: >>> [...] >>> This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow vessel for >>> sponsors. >> Really Craige? REALLY? I honestly can't believe you'd even *think* LA >> would be involved in something like that, let alone put it in print. > Hey Tim :-) > > "Looks" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in my quote above. > > At the time of writing I had a single announcement and a website (that I went > through) both of which showed no trace of community involvement you'd expect > but here was conference that is LCA in format but uses a diferent name. > >> As for the rest of your comments, I'm pretty sure they're largely >> addressed by Russell Stuart's subsequent email (thanks Russell, BTW). > Yes, largely although not completely. Stuart's response was excellent. Thanks > Stuart :-) > > As other commentators have mentioned, there are significant issues around > transparency, process and other things. > > My current take is that some members of the council admirably stepped into the > "no LCA" breach with a line of thought that looks a like "what if LCA but named > OE?" > > The LA constitution has no mission statement because it's assumed by the > community that we know what that mission is. I'll take these notes from the > website: > > "facilitates internationally-renowned events including linux.conf.au - > Australasia?s grassroots Free and Open Source Software Conference." > > "facilitates the organisation of linux.conf.au, a premier international Linux > conference, in a different Australasian city each year." > > "undertakes to operate at all times in an open, transparent and democratic > manner" https://linux.org.au/about-us/ That's pretty much the reason LA > exists, it's the 1 job we have. Some of the council have technically > fulfilled that assumed mission but called it something else. This > feels pretty close to SGM territory to me. That the overlap between > LCA and OE should have been addressed at the council level but wasn't > is of concern to me. "This is LCA, just call it that". > > At the very least we should consider adopting a mission statement - as over the > last 6 years or so it's become an increasingly obvious the membership and > subsequent councils (including myself and councils I've served on) are not > entirely clear on LA's purpose. > > That's why we find ourselves in this position. > > A mission statement will at least laser our focus in on whether we are > "Linux Australia" or "Conference Australia". > > A suggested mission statement could read something like: > > "Linux Australia facilitates the internationally-renowned conference - > linux.conf.au - Australasia?s premi?re grassroots Free and Open Source Software > Conference in an open, transparent and democratic manner. > > Linux Australia also facilitates conferences that share the common values of Free > and Open Source Software" > > Such a mission statement makes it clear what we do and what our priorities are: > LCA first, others as a nice bi-product of LCA's success. > > It also makes it clear that "OE" should have been named LCA or rejected because > it is LCA by another name and as such would represent a conflict of interest. > > -- > Craige McWhirter > Signal: +61 4685 91819 > Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lloy0076 at adam.com.au Sat Oct 22 16:35:10 2022 From: lloy0076 at adam.com.au (David Lloyd) Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2022 01:35:10 -0400 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <4d11b40b-26c0-ad39-4c9a-d15ef00ba18e@kathyreid.id.au> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <6347C0A7.8080001@wirejunkie.com> <20221021020718.y7b7lh2rm3tjx7aq@dionach> <4d11b40b-26c0-ad39-4c9a-d15ef00ba18e@kathyreid.id.au> Message-ID: <2a4bf359-4c1c-881c-6231-b5a0f306b339@adam.com.au> Strangely, it doesn't seem the NSW Incorporations Act 2009 requires any objectives in a constitution at all (but the SA Incorporations Act 1985 does). Broad aims might be appropriate for a constitution; and in fact it's unlikely the original constitution did not have any aims/objectives at all (my leaky memory says that it did actually have them). I would note that the constitution committed at [https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/commit/4c1e5776c25f6792251601c49e81c5b09095539a] is basically the model constitution, and subsequent edits have basically remove irrelevant parts of it. The model constitution - being a model constitution - obviously doesn't have any objectives/aims in it. That being said, the organisation could: * Adopt one or two broad statement about what its aims are Something like "Linux Australia's goals are to help build a world where the freedoms and opportunities of open source software, and the open source philosophy, can be enjoyed by all." (this is a slight rewording of the OSI's vision and it's not meant as a serious suggestion, just as a pointer as to what I mean. Notice that it's so broad EO, PyConAU, helping Open Agriculture Australia through sponsorship would all be valid activities. Acting to reduce open source software would not be.). *Or* the organisation could adopt the same things, but as policy under the custody of the group members - for whom the committee acts as stewards. *Either* of these are legally valid outcomes; and the aims/objectives (or mission statement if you will) are important but the /most important part/ is that it seems that the _process_ of building a consensus as to what they should be might be beneficial for the organisation if someone had the time and expertise to build that consensus. Time out. Deep breaths. Remember that we're not here to fight each other. And then maybe regroup and figure out where to next, and what we've learned from all this? DSL On 21/10/2022 9:59 am, Kathy Reid via linux-aus wrote: > > Hi Craige, > > I'd like to address your proposals from a constitutional perspective. > > I'm doing this to negate any perception that the membership is not > correctly informed about the processes they have to take action - you > can only make change if you're able to know the structures through > which power is wielded. Moreover, the Council is now in the busiest > period of their working year, and is dealing with a significant > additional workload as a result of these discussions - so I'm doing > what we as a community do best: bringing our multiple talents together > to make a better whole. Clearly, I do not speak for Council - this > information is coming from my experience previously with Council. > > > 1. Proposing to include a mission statement in the Constitution > > Linux Australia Inc. is an Incorporated Association under the NSW Fair > Trading Act. NSW Fair Trading provides a model constitution for > Incorporated Associations [0]. This does not include a mission > statement, although there is nothing to preclude a mission statement > being included in the constitution. I would advise against it however, > due to S(39) of the constitution of LA, which reads verbatim: > > > 38. Change of name, objects and constitution > > An application to the Director-General for registration of a change in > the association?s name, objects or constitution in accordance with > section 10 of the Act is to be made by the public officer or a > committee member. > > > In practice, this means that if the Linux Australia Committee > (Council) saw fit to update the organisation's mission or mission > statement (say in response to changes in the external environment like > a once in a hundred year pandemic), then the LA Council would have to > apply to the Director General of Fair Trading NSW to be able to update > the Constitution. This has been done before - for example to update > our financial year to coincide with when the bulk of conferences > happen to make it easier to audit the books and forecast future > financials. So, doing this creates a dependency LA Council may not want. > > There's a separate thread here about the Fair Trading Model > Constitution having being updated recently - and LA's existing > constitution now having drifted somewhat from the Model constitution - > which was updated last month - but I am confident this is on Council's > radar. > > > 2. Proposing a mission statement for the organisation that is codified > separately to the constitution > > Alternatively, LA may wish to have a Mission Statement that is > codified outside of the Constitution, to avoid the dependency outlined > above. This is well within the remit of Council to enact (see S(13) > for Powers of the Committee). We already have this in some form, such > as the Linux Australia values, which I believe you're quoting from > directly [1]. There is nothing required constitutionally for the LA > Council to change the statement of values, mission statement etc. > There is no requirement for the Council to consult the Membership on > doing this, although in practice how they approach this is up to Council. > > > 3. Assigning primacy to Linux Conference Australia in the mission > statement, statement of values or other guiding principles of the > organisation > > There is nothing constitutionally to stop the LA Council from > assigning primacy to a particular event, purpose or activity in the > guiding principles of the organisation. > > However, you may wish to consider whether LCA actually does have > primacy in the way that Linux Australia currently operates. For > example, in terms of gross revenue, LCA over the last two reporting > periods accounted for about only a third of Linux Australia's profit. > I've taken the liberty of visualising this in this quick and dirty > spreadsheet: > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZHfmUTpvxZJSYigyBTCtNlEhG0t7g9mtF5NxR7kapfg/edit?usp=sharing > > This may have changed given the pandemic - and will likely change with > PyConAU, which is a significant revenue contribution, not running in > 2022. But my point is valid - LCA does not have financial primacy. > It's a significant event - absolutely - it's the largest single > contributor to revenue. But it's far from the only one. Does this > ascribe it primacy? I don't think so. > > LA was founded to auspice LCA, certainly. But over time, like with > most organisations, it has adapted and diversified. Time and again > history shows us that survival equates to adaptability. > > > 4. Special General Meetings > > The constitutional arrangements for SGMs are outlined in S(25) of the > constitution, which I am quoting verbatim here for clarity: > > > 25. Special general meetings ? calling of > > (1) The committee may, whenever it thinks fit, convene a special > general meeting of the association. > (2) The committee must, on the requisition in writing of at least 5 > per cent of the total number of members or 20 members, whichever > number is fewer, convene a special general meeting of the association. > (3) A requisition of members for a special general meeting: > (a) must state the purpose or purposes of the meeting, and > (b) must be signed by the members making the requisition, and > (c) must be lodged with the secretary, and > (d) may consist of several documents in a similar form, each signed by > one or more of the members making the requisition. > (4) If the committee fails to convene a special general meeting to be > held within 1 month after that date on which a requisition of members > for the meeting is lodged with the secretary, any one or more of the > members who made the requisition may convene a special general meeting > to be held not later than 3 months after that date. > (5) A special general meeting convened by a member or members as > referred to in subclause (4) must be convened as nearly as is > practicable in the same manner as general meetings are convened by the > committee. > > In practice, SGMs have been used to propose constitutional amendments. > > I don't know what Linux Australia's current membership # are, and the > Secretary will be able to advise if requested, so that the 5% number > can be calculated above. Based on previous membership numbers, the 20 > members figure would definitely be the lesser number per S(25)(2). > > > 5. Updating Membership details > > Marcus Herstik previously identified an issue with the Membership > login to https://linux.org.au - thank you Marcus for identifying this. > This has now been resolved (with many thanks to Neill Cox and Steve > Walsh). If people wish to view their Membership status or Membership > information, they can do so now on the website. Only current Members > may vote in motions on an SGM or AGM. The voting module in CiviCRM on > the Linux Australia website enforces this requirement - you have to > log in to be able to vote in elections, and the elections module is > also used to do voting on proposals (such as the previous renaming > proposal). > > The Register of Members is dealt with in S(7) of the Constitution, and > the Members module within CiviCRM on the website provides compliance > with these requirements. > > > Regards, > > Kathy Reid > > > [0] > https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/associations-and-co-operatives/associations/starting-an-association/model-constitution > > [1] https://linux.org.au/about-us/values/ > > [2] > https://linux.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/annual-report-2022-combined-hires.pdf > > > > > > > > On 21/10/2022 1:07 pm, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 18:39:19 +1100, Tim Serong via linux-aus wrote: >>> On 13/10/22 10:29, Craige McWhirter wrote: >>>> [...] >>>> This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow vessel for >>>> sponsors. >>> Really Craige? REALLY? I honestly can't believe you'd even *think* LA >>> would be involved in something like that, let alone put it in print. >> Hey Tim :-) >> >> "Looks" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in my quote above. >> >> At the time of writing I had a single announcement and a website (that I went >> through) both of which showed no trace of community involvement you'd expect >> but here was conference that is LCA in format but uses a diferent name. >> >>> As for the rest of your comments, I'm pretty sure they're largely >>> addressed by Russell Stuart's subsequent email (thanks Russell, BTW). >> Yes, largely although not completely. Stuart's response was excellent. Thanks >> Stuart :-) >> >> As other commentators have mentioned, there are significant issues around >> transparency, process and other things. >> >> My current take is that some members of the council admirably stepped into the >> "no LCA" breach with a line of thought that looks a like "what if LCA but named >> OE?" >> >> The LA constitution has no mission statement because it's assumed by the >> community that we know what that mission is. I'll take these notes from the >> website: >> >> "facilitates internationally-renowned events including linux.conf.au - >> Australasia?s grassroots Free and Open Source Software Conference." >> >> "facilitates the organisation of linux.conf.au, a premier international Linux >> conference, in a different Australasian city each year." >> >> "undertakes to operate at all times in an open, transparent and democratic >> manner" https://linux.org.au/about-us/ That's pretty much the reason LA >> exists, it's the 1 job we have. Some of the council have technically >> fulfilled that assumed mission but called it something else. This >> feels pretty close to SGM territory to me. That the overlap between >> LCA and OE should have been addressed at the council level but wasn't >> is of concern to me. "This is LCA, just call it that". >> >> At the very least we should consider adopting a mission statement - as over the >> last 6 years or so it's become an increasingly obvious the membership and >> subsequent councils (including myself and councils I've served on) are not >> entirely clear on LA's purpose. >> >> That's why we find ourselves in this position. >> >> A mission statement will at least laser our focus in on whether we are >> "Linux Australia" or "Conference Australia". >> >> A suggested mission statement could read something like: >> >> "Linux Australia facilitates the internationally-renowned conference - >> linux.conf.au - Australasia?s premi?re grassroots Free and Open Source Software >> Conference in an open, transparent and democratic manner. >> >> Linux Australia also facilitates conferences that share the common values of Free >> and Open Source Software" >> >> Such a mission statement makes it clear what we do and what our priorities are: >> LCA first, others as a nice bi-product of LCA's success. >> >> It also makes it clear that "OE" should have been named LCA or rejected because >> it is LCA by another name and as such would represent a conflict of interest. >> >> -- >> Craige McWhirter >> Signal: +61 4685 91819 >> Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-aus mailing list >> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jwoithe at just42.net Sat Oct 22 18:21:14 2022 From: jwoithe at just42.net (Jonathan Woithe) Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2022 17:51:14 +1030 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <4d73057a-1d60-6d34-f217-6bdf2a6899cd@petermoulding.com> References: <20221012232903.edrli735f2is2pxy@dionach> <5c5d6dff-2771-48ac-0de2-72f3c57f4449@mabula.net> <2a6aabac-78ff-a029-8683-587ff7550077@stuart.id.au> <676032CE-EC30-4721-B5A0-172326D4E18F@addison.net.au> <3b22c35e-eeaa-b607-9387-13b868ace9b0@icloud.com> <4d73057a-1d60-6d34-f217-6bdf2a6899cd@petermoulding.com> Message-ID: Hi Peter On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 11:09:13AM +1100, Info via linux-aus wrote: > When is the topic list, calls for speakers, whatever, so I can see what days > would be useful? Day tickets? I understand the Call for Sessions/Papers will be issued within the next week or two. The list of broad topics forms part of the Call for Sessions so it will come out at the same time. Obviously the program details - paper titles, how exactly streams will be organised, and so on - will come out after the Call for Sessions closes and the Session Selection Committee have worked through the submissions. I am not sure exactly how long the Call for Sessions will remain open for, but this information will form part of the Call for Sessions. In line with how most conferences operate, I expect full details about tickets to be released when ticket sales open, which tends to happen around the time that the program is announced. Regards jonathan From marcus at herstik.com Sun Oct 23 08:20:24 2022 From: marcus at herstik.com (Marcus Herstik) Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2022 08:20:24 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <4d11b40b-26c0-ad39-4c9a-d15ef00ba18e@kathyreid.id.au> References: <4d11b40b-26c0-ad39-4c9a-d15ef00ba18e@kathyreid.id.au> Message-ID: <2F419FDE-75B7-403A-8A17-E6D385FF81CC@herstik.com> Hi Kathy, Thanks for the information. > On 22 Oct 2022, at 12:00 pm, Kathy Reid via linux-aus wrote: > I'd like to address your proposals from a constitutional perspective. > What do you propose if Council, or one member, does not do as the Constitution states must be done? On the 17th at 9:30am I made a request of the Secretary (via email to secretary at linux.org.au as I was advised to use) for specific information, under the constitution. As of Friday no response has been received, nor has there been a reply or any indication that they are working on it. I will leave you (and everyone else) to consider if Friday was the 5th business day. I look forward to reporting soon whether I receive it. > you can only make change if you're able to know the structures through which power is wielded. > And if they choose to respond. > Moreover, the Council is now in the busiest period of their working year, > They chose to put on a new event, so that is their choice and the members do not need to make exceptions for their choice. If they couldn?t deal with it and there is a conflict of time (or interests) their position on the LA Council comes first, with regards to LA and OE. > and is dealing with a significant additional workload as a result of these discussions > I fail to see how it is ?significant? besides reading some emails. They don?t respond to each email, nor do they have to. > 3. Assigning primacy to Linux Conference Australia in the mission statement, statement of values or other guiding principles of the organisation > > There is nothing constitutionally to stop the LA Council from assigning primacy to a particular event, purpose or activity in the guiding principles of the organisation. > And there is nothing to stop the LA Council from entering a penguin in a dog show. (Except getting the penguin.) > However, you may wish to consider whether LCA actually does have primacy in the way that Linux Australia currently operates. For example, in terms of gross revenue, LCA over the last two reporting periods accounted for about only a third of Linux Australia's profit. > That?s a significant amount. > I've taken the liberty of visualising this in this quick and dirty spreadsheet: > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZHfmUTpvxZJSYigyBTCtNlEhG0t7g9mtF5NxR7kapfg/edit?usp=sharing > > This may have changed given the pandemic - and will likely change with PyConAU, which is a significant revenue contribution, not running in 2022. > Can you go back five years rather than 2 years? Also, to further murky your point we must consider, as an association and not a profit driven business, does the fact that it makes a profit drive primacy? LCA is the largest income AND expense. In 2021 it produced ~$117k and cost $78k (50% being AV/network equipment). So while it is (barely) the largest contributor it is also the largest event by expense and still turns a significant profit. That makes it a rather significant undertaking and one LA was created for, as you state further down. > But my point is valid - LCA does not have financial primacy. It's a significant event - absolutely - it's the largest single contributor to revenue. > I find it hard to parse this statement. Single largest contributor but not of primacy. > But it's far from the only one. Does this ascribe it primacy? I don't think so. > So what will OE be if it is replacing LCA as the largest financial contributor in 2023? The single largest contributor but not of primacy? > LA was founded to auspice LCA, certainly. > Well that seems weird - it was founded for the LCA. A patron is there to shepherd, guide and promote, but in this case it?s not of primacy. > But over time, like with most organisations, it has adapted and diversified. Time and again history shows us that survival equates to adaptability. > > > Adapt or die huh? So LA was founded to ?auspice? the LCA and by this definition the LA council has failed as they did not ?auspice? it for 2023 - they replaced it. Nor have they ?auspiced? LCA 2024 because they are too busy. Seems like maybe the LA Council is there to run OE. So was LCA dying? One could ask is LA dying instead. > 4. Special General Meetings > > The constitutional arrangements for SGMs are outlined in S(25) of the constitution, > > In practice, SGMs have been used to propose constitutional amendments. > And they can be used for other things. > I don't know what Linux Australia's current membership # are, and the Secretary will be able to advise if requested. > And they have 5 business days to reply. But what if they don?t reply? > 5. Updating Membership details > > Marcus Herstik previously identified an issue with the Membership login to https://linux.org.au - thank you Marcus for identifying this. This has now been resolved (with many thanks to Neill Cox and Steve Walsh). > Thanks. > The Register of Members is dealt with in S(7) of the Constitution, and the Members module within CiviCRM on the website provides compliance with these requirements. > > > Pity the Council does not operate by the rules except for when they are using it as a shield. > Regards, > > Kathy Reid > > > > [0] https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/associations-and-co-operatives/associations/starting-an-association/model-constitution > > [1] https://linux.org.au/about-us/values/ > > [2] https://linux.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/annual-report-2022-combined-hires.pdf > > > > > > On 21/10/2022 1:07 pm, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 18:39:19 +1100, Tim Serong via linux-aus wrote: >>> On 13/10/22 10:29, Craige McWhirter wrote: >>>> [...] >>>> This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow vessel for >>>> sponsors. >>> Really Craige? REALLY? I honestly can't believe you'd even *think* LA >>> would be involved in something like that, let alone put it in print. >> Hey Tim :-) >> >> "Looks" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in my quote above. >> >> At the time of writing I had a single announcement and a website (that I went >> through) both of which showed no trace of community involvement you'd expect >> but here was conference that is LCA in format but uses a diferent name. >> >>> As for the rest of your comments, I'm pretty sure they're largely >>> addressed by Russell Stuart's subsequent email (thanks Russell, BTW). >> Yes, largely although not completely. Stuart's response was excellent. Thanks >> Stuart :-) >> >> As other commentators have mentioned, there are significant issues around >> transparency, process and other things. >> >> My current take is that some members of the council admirably stepped into the >> "no LCA" breach with a line of thought that looks a like "what if LCA but named >> OE?" >> >> The LA constitution has no mission statement because it's assumed by the >> community that we know what that mission is. I'll take these notes from the >> website: >> >> "facilitates internationally-renowned events including linux.conf.au - >> Australasia?s grassroots Free and Open Source Software Conference." >> >> "facilitates the organisation of linux.conf.au, a premier international Linux >> conference, in a different Australasian city each year." >> >> "undertakes to operate at all times in an open, transparent and democratic >> manner" >> >> https://linux.org.au/about-us/ >> >> That's pretty much the reason LA exists, it's the 1 job we have. >> >> Some of the council have technically fulfilled that assumed mission but called >> it something else. >> >> This feels pretty close to SGM territory to me. >> >> That the overlap between LCA and OE should have been addressed at the council >> level but wasn't is of concern to me. "This is LCA, just call it that". >> >> At the very least we should consider adopting a mission statement - as over the >> last 6 years or so it's become an increasingly obvious the membership and >> subsequent councils (including myself and councils I've served on) are not >> entirely clear on LA's purpose. >> >> That's why we find ourselves in this position. >> >> A mission statement will at least laser our focus in on whether we are >> "Linux Australia" or "Conference Australia". >> >> A suggested mission statement could read something like: >> >> "Linux Australia facilitates the internationally-renowned conference - >> linux.conf.au - Australasia?s premi?re grassroots Free and Open Source Software >> Conference in an open, transparent and democratic manner. >> >> Linux Australia also facilitates conferences that share the common values of Free >> and Open Source Software" >> >> Such a mission statement makes it clear what we do and what our priorities are: >> LCA first, others as a nice bi-product of LCA's success. >> >> It also makes it clear that "OE" should have been named LCA or rejected because >> it is LCA by another name and as such would represent a conflict of interest. >> >> -- >> Craige McWhirter >> Signal: +61 4685 91819 >> Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-aus mailing list >> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From linuxaus at joeladdison.com Sun Oct 23 15:21:01 2022 From: linuxaus at joeladdison.com (President, Linux Australia) Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2022 14:21:01 +1000 Subject: [Linux-aus] Important Notice to Linux Australia Members Message-ID: Dear Linux Australia Members, This is a notice to inform you that a Linux Australia member has requested a list of members under Section 7 of the Linux Australia Constitution [0]. Additionally, contact information for members was requested for the purpose of contacting members. The Linux Australia Council has reviewed this request and determined that a list of member names will be provided under the provision of Section 7 (3) and 7 (4). Council has determined that contact details for members will not be provided. Linux Australia is committed to protecting the personal information provided to the organisation through membership, events and all other activities, per our Privacy Policy [1]. As such, we will not be releasing contact details for any members as this would be a breach of privacy. Linux Australia would like to take this opportunity to remind members that they are able to request that their membership details, other than their name, be made unavailable for inspection by other members under the provision of Section 7 (5). This can be done via the Member Area on the website, by choosing to Update your Profile. If you have any questions on this matter, please contact Council at council at linux.org.au. [0] https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/blob/master/constitution.txt [1] https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/blob/master/privacy_policy.md Regards, Joel Addison President Linux Australia president at linux.org.au http://linux.org.au Linux Australia Inc GPO Box 4788 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia Limited Liability (NSW) Y2998126 ABN 56 987 117 479 ARBN 618 108 544 From lilly at attacus.net Sun Oct 23 16:47:48 2022 From: lilly at attacus.net (Lilly Ryan) Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2022 16:47:48 +1100 Subject: [Linux-aus] Announcing Everything Open - Conference 2023 In-Reply-To: <2F419FDE-75B7-403A-8A17-E6D385FF81CC@herstik.com> References: <4d11b40b-26c0-ad39-4c9a-d15ef00ba18e@kathyreid.id.au> <2F419FDE-75B7-403A-8A17-E6D385FF81CC@herstik.com> Message-ID: I confess that, having read this thread up and down, I am not certain what you are attempting to achieve with your queries. You?re likely within your rights to ask these questions, but I doubt the result is going to be that LCA runs in 2023. It is more likely to be taking time and attention away from the conference that *is* trying to run, not to mention a significant amount of emotional labour on behalf of many people reading this list. Changes are not always easy to deal with, it?s true. I know many of us were looking forward to a conference to get together with our communities after a long and weird couple of years, and probably expected it would be LCA. As a member of the community, I?m just as pleased for EO to take that space as LCA, and I?m really glad that there are folks in the community who still have the energy to put an event together in their spare time. On Sun, 23 Oct 2022, at 8:20 AM, Marcus Herstik via linux-aus wrote: > Hi Kathy, > > Thanks for the information. > > >> On 22 Oct 2022, at 12:00 pm, Kathy Reid via linux-aus wrote: >> I'd like to address your proposals from a constitutional perspective. >> > > What do you propose if Council, or one member, does not do as the Constitution states must be done? > > On the 17th at 9:30am I made a request of the Secretary (via email to secretary at linux.org.au as I was advised to use) for specific information, under the constitution. > As of Friday no response has been received, nor has there been a reply or any indication that they are working on it. > I will leave you (and everyone else) to consider if Friday was the 5th business day. > I look forward to reporting soon whether I receive it. >> >> >> you can only make change if you're able to know the structures through which power is wielded. >> > And if they choose to respond. >> Moreover, the Council is now in the busiest period of their working year, >> > They chose to put on a new event, so that is their choice and the members do not need to make exceptions for their choice. > If they couldn?t deal with it and there is a conflict of time (or interests) their position on the LA Council comes first, with regards to LA and OE. > >> and is dealing with a significant additional workload as a result of these discussions >> > I fail to see how it is ?significant? besides reading some emails. They don?t respond to each email, nor do they have to. >> 3. Assigning primacy to Linux Conference Australia in the mission statement, statement of values or other guiding principles of the organisation >> >> There is nothing constitutionally to stop the LA Council from assigning primacy to a particular event, purpose or activity in the guiding principles of the organisation. >> > And there is nothing to stop the LA Council from entering a penguin in a dog show. (Except getting the penguin.) > >> >> >> However, you may wish to consider whether LCA actually does have primacy in the way that Linux Australia currently operates. For example, in terms of gross revenue, LCA over the last two reporting periods accounted for about only a third of Linux Australia's profit. >> > That?s a significant amount. > >> I've taken the liberty of visualising this in this quick and dirty spreadsheet: >> >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZHfmUTpvxZJSYigyBTCtNlEhG0t7g9mtF5NxR7kapfg/edit?usp=sharing >> >> This may have changed given the pandemic - and will likely change with PyConAU, which is a significant revenue contribution, not running in 2022. >> > Can you go back five years rather than 2 years? > Also, to further murky your point we must consider, as an association and not a profit driven business, does the fact that it makes a profit drive primacy? > > LCA is the largest income AND expense. > In 2021 it produced ~$117k and cost $78k (50% being AV/network equipment). > So while it is (barely) the largest contributor it is also the largest event by expense and still turns a significant profit. > That makes it a rather significant undertaking and one LA was created for, as you state further down. >> But my point is valid - LCA does not have financial primacy. It's a significant event - absolutely - it's the largest single contributor to revenue. >> > I find it hard to parse this statement. > Single largest contributor but not of primacy. >> But it's far from the only one. Does this ascribe it primacy? I don't think so. >> > So what will OE be if it is replacing LCA as the largest financial contributor in 2023? > The single largest contributor but not of primacy? > >> >> >> LA was founded to auspice LCA, certainly. >> > Well that seems weird - it was founded for the LCA. > A patron is there to shepherd, guide and promote, but in this case it?s not of primacy. >> But over time, like with most organisations, it has adapted and diversified. Time and again history shows us that survival equates to adaptability. >> >> >> > Adapt or die huh? > > So LA was founded to ?auspice? the LCA and by this definition the LA council has failed as they did not ?auspice? it for 2023 - they replaced it. > Nor have they ?auspiced? LCA 2024 because they are too busy. > Seems like maybe the LA Council is there to run OE. > > So was LCA dying? > One could ask is LA dying instead. > >> >> >> 4. Special General Meetings >> >> The constitutional arrangements for SGMs are outlined in S(25) of the constitution, >> >> In practice, SGMs have been used to propose constitutional amendments. >> > And they can be used for other things. >> >> >> I don't know what Linux Australia's current membership # are, and the Secretary will be able to advise if requested. >> > And they have 5 business days to reply. > But what if they don?t reply? > >> 5. Updating Membership details >> >> Marcus Herstik previously identified an issue with the Membership login to https://linux.org.au - thank you Marcus for identifying this. This has now been resolved (with many thanks to Neill Cox and Steve Walsh). >> > Thanks. >> The Register of Members is dealt with in S(7) of the Constitution, and the Members module within CiviCRM on the website provides compliance with these requirements. >> >> >> > Pity the Council does not operate by the rules except for when they are using it as a shield. > >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Kathy Reid >> >> >> >> [0] https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/associations-and-co-operatives/associations/starting-an-association/model-constitution >> >> [1] https://linux.org.au/about-us/values/ >> >> [2] https://linux.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/annual-report-2022-combined-hires.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> On 21/10/2022 1:07 pm, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 18:39:19 +1100, Tim Serong via linux-aus wrote: >>> >>>> On 13/10/22 10:29, Craige McWhirter wrote: >>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> This no longer looks like a community event but rather a hollow vessel for >>>>> sponsors. >>>>> >>>> Really Craige? REALLY? I honestly can't believe you'd even *think* LA >>>> would be involved in something like that, let alone put it in print. >>>> >>> Hey Tim :-) >>> >>> "Looks" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in my quote above. >>> >>> At the time of writing I had a single announcement and a website (that I went >>> through) both of which showed no trace of community involvement you'd expect >>> but here was conference that is LCA in format but uses a diferent name. >>> >>> >>>> As for the rest of your comments, I'm pretty sure they're largely >>>> addressed by Russell Stuart's subsequent email (thanks Russell, BTW). >>>> >>> Yes, largely although not completely. Stuart's response was excellent. Thanks >>> Stuart :-) >>> >>> As other commentators have mentioned, there are significant issues around >>> transparency, process and other things. >>> >>> My current take is that some members of the council admirably stepped into the >>> "no LCA" breach with a line of thought that looks a like "what if LCA but named >>> OE?" >>> >>> The LA constitution has no mission statement because it's assumed by the >>> community that we know what that mission is. I'll take these notes from the >>> website: >>> >>> "facilitates internationally-renowned events including linux.conf.au - >>> Australasia?s grassroots Free and Open Source Software Conference." >>> >>> "facilitates the organisation of linux.conf.au, a premier international Linux >>> conference, in a different Australasian city each year." >>> >>> "undertakes to operate at all times in an open, transparent and democratic >>> manner" >>> >>> https://linux.org.au/about-us/ >>> >>> That's pretty much the reason LA exists, it's the 1 job we have. >>> >>> Some of the council have technically fulfilled that assumed mission but called >>> it something else. >>> >>> This feels pretty close to SGM territory to me. >>> >>> That the overlap between LCA and OE should have been addressed at the council >>> level but wasn't is of concern to me. " This is LCA, just call it that". >>> >>> At the very least we should consider adopting a mission statement - as over the >>> last 6 years or so it's become an increasingly obvious the membership and >>> subsequent councils (including myself and councils I've served on) are not >>> entirely clear on LA's purpose. >>> >>> That's why we find ourselves in this position. >>> >>> A mission statement will at least laser our focus in on whether we are >>> "Linux Australia" or "Conference Australia". >>> >>> A suggested mission statement could read something like: >>> >>> "Linux Australia facilitates the internationally-renowned conference - >>> linux.conf.au - Australasia?s premi?re grassroots Free and Open Source Software >>> Conference in an open, transparent and democratic manner. >>> >>> Linux Australia also facilitates conferences that share the common values of Free >>> and Open Source Software" >>> >>> Such a mission statement makes it clear what we do and what our priorities are: >>> LCA first, others as a nice bi-product of LCA's success. >>> >>> It also makes it clear that "OE" should have been named LCA or rejected because >>> it is LCA by another name and as such would represent a conflict of interest. >>> >>> -- >>> Craige McWhirter >>> Signal: +61 4685 91819 >>> Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> linux-aus mailing list >>> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >>> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus >>> >>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >>> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-aus mailing list >> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au >> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to >> linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au > _______________________________________________ > linux-aus mailing list > linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to > linux-aus-unsubscribe at lists.linux.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bret at busby.net Sun Oct 23 20:56:35 2022 From: bret at busby.net (Bret Busby) Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2022 17:56:35 +0800 Subject: [Linux-aus] Fwd: [Announce] Important Notice to Linux Australia Members In-Reply-To: <62093cca-a043-8a01-e1f8-7f995a3c7027@busby.net> References: <62093cca-a043-8a01-e1f8-7f995a3c7027@busby.net> Message-ID: <0c1b41b0-63e8-bdac-c2db-193df7399e4d@busby.net> This message is sent to the Linux Australia mailing list, as sending it to the Linux Australia council, bounced. Bret Busby Armadale West Australia (UTC+0800) .............. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [Announce] Important Notice to Linux Australia Members Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2022 17:46:59 +0800 From: Bret Busby To: council at linux.org.au On 23/10/22 12:21, President, Linux Australia wrote: > Dear Linux Australia Members, > > This is a notice to inform you that a Linux Australia member has requested a list of members under Section 7 of the Linux Australia Constitution [0]. Additionally, contact information for members was requested for the purpose of contacting members. > > The Linux Australia Council has reviewed this request and determined that a list of member names will be provided under the provision of Section 7 (3) and 7 (4). > > Council has determined that contact details for members will not be provided. Linux Australia is committed to protecting the personal information provided to the organisation through membership, events and all other activities, per our Privacy Policy [1]. As such, we will not be releasing contact details for any members as this would be a breach of privacy. > > Linux Australia would like to take this opportunity to remind members that they are able to request that their membership details, other than their name, be made unavailable for inspection by other members under the provision of Section 7 (5). This can be done via the Member Area on the website, by choosing to Update your Profile. > > If you have any questions on this matter, please contact Council at council at linux.org.au. > > [0] https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/blob/master/constitution.txt > [1] https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/blob/master/privacy_policy.md > > > Regards, > > Joel Addison > > President > Linux Australia > > president at linux.org.au > http://linux.org.au > > Linux Australia Inc > GPO Box 4788 > Sydney NSW 2001 > Australia > > Limited Liability (NSW) Y2998126 > ABN 56 987 117 479 > ARBN 618 108 544 > _______________________________________________ > announce mailing list > announce at lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/announce Hello. In the context of the above message, if a member is allowed to request and obtain, a list of members and the contact details of of the listed members, for the purpose of contacting the members, are the members allowed to request, and, have published to the affected members, the name of the member who made the request, and, any reasons given for the making of the request? If so, can the name of the member who made the request, and, any stated reasons given for the making of the request, please be announced to the members, using the same medium as the above notice? Thank you in anticipation. I am willing for a copy of this request message to be sent to the members, if the council deems it appropriate. .. Bret Busby Armadale West Australia (UTC+0800) .............. From jwoithe at just42.net Sun Oct 23 23:41:28 2022 From: jwoithe at just42.net (Jonathan Woithe) Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2022 23:11:28 +1030 Subject: [Linux-aus] Fwd: [Announce] Important Notice to Linux Australia Members In-Reply-To: <0c1b41b0-63e8-bdac-c2db-193df7399e4d@busby.net> References: <62093cca-a043-8a01-e1f8-7f995a3c7027@busby.net> <0c1b41b0-63e8-bdac-c2db-193df7399e4d@busby.net> Message-ID: Hi Bret On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 05:56:35PM +0800, Bret Busby via linux-aus wrote: > This message is sent to the Linux Australia mailing list, as sending it to > the Linux Australia council, bounced. The "council at linux.org.au" address is valid and should not have bounced for your. We would like to better understand what might have happened here. Could you please follow up off-list with the bounce message you received so we can look into it and rectify whatever problem might be identified? On Sun, 23 Oct 2022 at 17:46:59 +0800, Bret Busby wrote: > On 23/10/22 12:21, President, Linux Australia wrote: > > Dear Linux Australia Members, > > > > This is a notice to inform you that a Linux Australia member has > > requested a list of members under Section 7 of the Linux Australia > > Constitution [0]. Additionally, contact information for members was > > requested for the purpose of contacting members. ... > > In the context of the above message, if a member is allowed to request and > obtain, a list of members and the contact details of of the listed members, > for the purpose of contacting the members, are the members allowed to > request, and, have published to the affected members, the name of the member > who made the request, and, any reasons given for the making of the request? The reason given for asking the request was included in Joel's email quoted above: "for the purpose of contacting members." It is worth reiterating the following point from Joel's message: Council has determined that contact details for members will not be provided. Linux Australia is committed to protecting the personal information provided to the organisation through membership, events and all other activities, per our Privacy Policy [1]. As such, we will not be releasing contact details for any members as this would be a breach of privacy. Therefore, while contact details were requested, they have not been provided for the reasons Joel outlined. The constitution [0] requires that member names and join dates be available for inspection by members. > If so, can the name of the member who made the request, and, any stated > reasons given for the making of the request, please be announced to the > members, using the same medium as the above notice? The reasons given for the making of the request were disclosed by Joel in the above notice. The formal request for information will be recorded in the minutes of the next Council meeting (scheduled for Wed 26 Oct 2022) as correspondance received. Thus the name of the requestor will be public following publication of those minutes on the LA website. As to whether the name of the member making the request can or should be disclosed in the manner you suggested, section 7 of the constitution [0] does not provide any guidance. In fact the notice sent by Joel is not formally required by the constitution - Council decided that it ought to be sent in the interests of transparency. As far as current Council members are aware, there is no precedent applicable to your query in the context of the present situation. Given that the requestor's name will be disclosed as a matter of course in the Council minutes as noted above, are you still wishing for their name to also be sent out using the same communication channels as the original notice? Regards jonathan (Ordinary Committee Member, Linux Australia Council) [0] https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/blob/master/constitution.txt [1] https://github.com/linuxaustralia/constitution_and_policies/blob/master/privacy_policy.md