[wlug_org] What is WLUG?

[Sam Sargeant]

On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 03:00:36PM -0700, Wood Brent wrote:
 
> Aside from goals/aims/mission statements/memorandums of corporate intent, etc,
> as one of the cabal who appear to have turned WLUG into such a den of
> improprieties (if not iniquities) that our primary founder no longer wants to
> be involved: is this something which we should be concerned about?

Firstly I think it's going pretty well, and kudos to everyone who helps out.

My only concern so far is we have two goals in the LUG mission, but those goals
are best fulfilled in two different ways. 

I really like the org team/cabal/list style of things. It's the best way to
support the first goal of sharing experience and knowledge with other Linux
users. 

On the other hand, we also want to work on Open Source advocacy. I have nothing
against the idea, but I feel that an formal group would be more appropriate for
that. It give us a Catch-22, providing you agree with me. :)

I thought the LUG should remain informal because the priority was around the
users. I haven't changed my opinion on that yet.

I obviously don't speak for anyone, but I could imagine frustration over the
split focus, and of the argument for formalisation.

It's not a major concern for me, and I'd be happy to continue on this way.

Sam.