Incorporation redux

Scott Elcomb psema4-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org
Thu Dec 8 01:18:44 UTC 2005


On 12/7/05, Evan Leibovitch <evan-ieNeDk6JonTYtjvyW6yDsg at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> All the signs have been -- and not a single argument here has challenged
> the notion -- that GTALUG was created to fix something that was never
> broken. Having a corporation doesn't magically make the website easier
> to manage or spam easier to extract from mailing lists. Nor does it
> simplify volunteer recruitment. In fact, it complicates things because
> of the costs and extra paperwork involved.

May very well be true, but the milk's already on the floor.  My belief
is that we should clean up any residual mess, and make the best of
what we have at this time.

> >Everyone knows the vision: To advocate linux and the open source communities within Toronto and the GTA by providing a forum for people to get together and discuss the topics among interested people.
> >
>
> Such a limited goal (one can hardly call it vision) is easily handled
> without incorporation. The forums are provided by websites, meetings and
> mailing lists, and none of that requires incorporation. Indeed, the vast
> majority of LUGs worldwide -- including those I have visited in cities
> such as Paris, Sydney, São Paulo and Tokyo -- are not incorporated, yet
> they manage to have high quality meetings and mailings -- not to mention
> social events -- just the same. Having a national body that is
> incorporated (Linux Verband, Japan Linux Association, AFUL, Linux
> Australia) which unincorporated local groups can use for infrastructure
> as necessary is a globally proven, efficient and successful model. Even
> Linux International can be (and has been) used in this context. And it
> also worked in Canada, for many years before GTALUG existed.

This has probably be answered before, but what things, in terms of
infrastucture, do these national bodies provide?

> The only time local LUG incorporation is normally considered is when
> there is a desire to do something substantial beyond meetings and
> mailings. Usually the nature of that desire is considered before
> incorporating (not after), and it's rarely done without getting a broad
> consensus of the pre-incorporation community. This is something that the
> founders of GTALUG most certainly never did.

Again, spilled milk.  If there was no _specific desire_ to something
something more substantial prior to incorporation, then we can, and
should, work towards identifying one (or more) that fits.  Something
I'm still trying to get used to in the business world is how long it
takes for anything to get done.

> And as for the name... it's completely incorrect that the incorporators
> could not use the name TLUG for legal reasons. I have a very detailed
> explanation of why, but I suspect that to many this thread has been
> tiresome.

Tiresome, yes.  But also valuable.  I don't think the story's finished
- and may not be for several months yet.  I think the only way this
conversation (over a few threads) will lose value is if we _stop_
discussing it.

> ---
>
> Those of us who hoped for rational debate and understanding about a
> greater purpose for incorporation, without personal attack, have been
> sadly disappointed. The founders and directors of GTALUG, who are
> generally very good and well-meaning people, just can't seem to grasp
> what's being asked for, and continuance of this thread is likely to
> generate far more heat than light in that regard. I consider this a
> missed opportunity for GTALUG to really demonstrate its value to the
> broader community, but that's how it goes...

See previous point above.

> To everyone else, I apologize. I genuinely hoped to help spark an
> enlightened discussion about GTALUG's future, one that could help
> produce some ideas or energize the community behind its LUG. Instead the
> spark seems to have lit a fuse or two. So long as the personal stuff
> subsides, I'll stop pressing the issue.
>
> Talk is cheap, there's too much real work to be done in the support of
> Linux and the advancement of open source use in Toronto.

I agree wholeheartedly.  But the question remains...  what's the "real work?"

For myself (as I've pointed out before) I'm just stabbing away in the
dark - trying to guess my way through to furthering the value of the
organization to/in the community.

--
Scott Elcomb
psema4.gotdns.com
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml





More information about the Legacy mailing list