TLUG's value to community ???

[John Macdonald]

(Some reordering on the quoted sections.)

On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 02:14:42PM -0400, billt-lxSQFCZeNF4 at public.gmane.org wrote:
> > 
> > For this kind of group, a formal organization and dues is not
> > an especially important facet is its success.  The important
> > thing is for people to be interested.  Out of those interested
> > people, a small subset that is enthused will make things happen.
> > 
>  And it is those same interested and enthused people that went ahead and formalized the group as a corporation. Also I should point out this was done with the blessing of the list at the time.

There was discussion with the same mixture of people thinking
that it was important+valuable/valueless+unnecessary.

The interested and enthused felt it important enough to go
ahead and do it - that's fine.  That does not mean that the
rest of TLUG is forever bound by the actions of this group.

> 
> > I have yet to see any need to membership dues justified -
> > there have been a few handwaving arguments that might be
> > fleshed out into true justifications with some work, but I'm
> > still somewhat skeptical.
> > 
>  The justification is very easy to understand. If you want to become a voting member of TLUG you have to pay your dues. If you don't wish to or care to vote on the future direction of TLUG you don't have to pay your dues. What the money is used for is a mute point. Today it is sitting in a bank account collecting interest. What use it is put to tomorrow is up to the paying members.

Wrong.

The people who pay their dues can decide the future directions
of GTALUG, but I don't conceed they this group is now in
charge and control of TLUG by virute of a small subset deciding
that money was required for some purposes and collecting it.
There have been other times when some people felt that TLUG had
a need and went about to fulfill it, with a mixutre of people of
agreeing that it was needed and others arguing that it was not.
The success of those projects did not affect how TLUG was run.

> > The fact that you seem to be searching for ways to spend the
> > money and accomplish services tells me that there isn't a
> > clear need.
> Again this is a mute point. When such needs arise the money will be available. I doubt you have a clear need for the RRSP you own. They are there for some indeterminate future use labeled retirement.

Having adequate income to continue to function in society after
you are unable to earn ongoing income is a pretty clear goal.
I'd put it as great deal better determined than the goals of the
GTALUG money.

> > 
> > But TPM is not a formal non-profit organization.  
> 
> I applaud the members of TPM but its still a mute point. You are correct in saying that TPM is not a formal non-profu organization, but GTALUG, and thus TLUG presently is. No amount of arguing over membership dues, what to do with the money, what the vision statement is etc... is going to change the fact that the government of Canada has issued a charter to GTALUG Inc. for the purposes of running this group.

But this whole discussion is about the fact that TLUG has
not issued a charter to GTALUG to manage this group and is
asking to be conviced that there is value in your so doing.
TLUG has been getting along just fine without being managed.

> > 
> > So, why does TLUG (which you are renaming to GTALUG) need all
> > this baggage and what does it actually gain us?
> > 
>  You are too late in asking this question. The baggage is there.

Not really.  You've got the baggage in GTALUG, but you haven't
convinced me to accept it as part of TLUG or that you have
any particular authority to do so without some sort of general
large scale concensus.

Other groups have felt interest and enthusiasm and created
things for TLUG.  Simple things, like finding a new location
when an existing location became unavailable.  Ongoing things
like setting up a mailing list, or a web page.  These projects
are accepted or rejected by the members of TLUG - either they
use the new feature, or they don't, and in either case they
talk about it on the mailing list (so *that* project was
guaranteed/doomed to succeed :-).  But, just because those
people did something that was determined to be useful did not
make them the arbiters of all future direction for TLUG.

You have been asked to justify your (claimed) position and
this response simply replies "because I said so and somebody
agreed".  Perhaps, if you try again, you can come up with a
more convincing argument.

-- 
--
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