[wellylug] Formalising WellyLUG - revisited

[Lindsay Hunter]

Jamie raises a good point.  Maybe we can do all we might want through 
NZOSS as a node?  Many of us already belong.  It will have similar 
objects? 

L

Jamie Dobbs wrote:

>On Tue, 2004-01-27 at 07:33, Damon Lynch wrote:
>  
>
>>On Mon, 2004-01-26 at 23:38, Jamie Dobbs wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>My own personal feeling (which seem to be shared by a number of others)is
>>>that the current set-up of the LUG works well for most people and that
>>>there is no real need to change this. Formalisation, in my view, will just
>>>deter many people, who might otherwise want to, from becoming involved
>>>with the group.
>>>      
>>>
>>Which LUGs are you comparing Wellylug with? Also, do you have any
>>examples of LUGs that have had their membership and outputs decrease
>>instead of increase when formalised?
>>    
>>
>
>No comparison is being made at all. If the majority want formalisation
>then that is what will happen. 
>I am simply stating my feelings on the subject, and those of a couple of
>people who have spoken to me directly on the subject.
>As has already been stated by Colin, perhaps formalisation is the wrong
>word to use, what is really being looked at is structure and
>organisation which I have no real issue with. 
>I think what most people have issue with is the idea of a subscription
>as there is the fear that this will deter people from joining the LUG,
>and there is no real need for a subscription as we have basically no
>costs. When there are costs (InstallFests etc.) they can often be self
>funding.
>Another thing that people appear to have issue with is having a
>committee, which in some cases can complicate things rather than ease
>them. If organisation of events etc. is needed then perhaps just look at
>an informal committee structure just for that event.
>
>
>
>
>  
>

-- 
Lindsay Hunter
021 636 926
04.934 1702