[wlug_org] $$$ to spend etc (was Individual liability from notbeing incorporated)

[Jamie Baddeley]

On Wed, 2004-08-11 at 21:15, Wood Brent wrote:
> --- Michael Dittmer <michael.dittmer@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> 
> > I'll second it Jamie
> > 
> > Hereby seconded!!!
> > 
> > Now can we move on??? 
> 
> Almost, just one point I'd like to clarify, which of course requires another
> book (or at least a chapter :-)
> 
Groan :-)

> > I support Brents suggestions completely with the addition of a more
> > managed (i.e org_team agrees on the contents of the poll prior to) use
> > of the poll/voting system (complete with web based user authentication)
> > as a form of "market research" to assist us in determining the views of
> > the LUG prior to an real_issue vote. This information is the input of
> > those who for what ever reason are not motivated to join the org_list,
> > BUT do have an opinion.
> > 
> > I move we adopt Brent's suggestion, plus Jethro's suggestion number 1.
> > 
> > who'll second me?
> 
> Question: Do you mean that for every issue we believe a membership/meeting vote
> is necessary, there MUST be a website poll first? That is how I read your
> amendment, Jamie. My apologies if I'm wrong (& if I'm wrong, then most of the
> rest of this msg is pretty much irrelevent, please skip to the incorporation
> bit at the bottom - chapter two - & delete chapter 1 from any replies!!!)
> 
No, just when it seems necessary. 

> I see the poll as a useful device to give the cabal direction, but not as an
> online vote which we have to go through before a meeting vote.

agreed. 


> If this was your intent, do we actually need to explicitly say this?
Yes, stop faffing around.

>  It seems
> to me the explicit change is actually different to the status quo, which
> doesn't specify anything, so 'tis a new guideline wot needs to be set down
> clearly in writing & voted on... does it not? 
> 
for god's sake man...

> Agreeing to the use of online polls if [we] think it appropriate is simply the
> status quo, 
No it's not. Currently polls go out without a mention to the org_list at
all. The motion changes this.

> And all this will become something voted on & recorded & stored as a rule? :-)
> 

No. These archives form pretty good minutes.

> (end of chapter 1)
> 
> (Chapter 2)
> 
> > 
> > jamie	
> > (I also think the wellylug.inc issue can be comfortably deferred)
> 
> Does anyone here feel differently?
> 
> Does this constitute a seconding? If this is the concensus, we need (after the
> discussion last meeting) to put some words together for a note to the wellylug
> list saying this (& describing why). To support Jamie's paradigm that as it was
> my idea, I get do it, I'm happy to write a book for that purpose :-)
> 
> Any seconders?
> 
anyone?