[plug] Society of Linux Professionals (WA) Inaugural Meeting

[Bret Busby]

On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Brian Tombleson wrote:

> Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:45:52 +0800
> From: Brian Tombleson <brian at paradigmit.com.au>
> Reply-To: plug at plug.linux.org.au
> To: plug at plug.linux.org.au
> Subject: Re: [plug] Society of Linux Professionals (WA) Inaugural Meeting
> Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:46:10 +0800 (WST)
> Resent-From: plug at plug.linux.org.au
> 
> 
> > > We have a draft set of rules:
> > > http://slpwa.linux.org.au/slpwarules.html
> 
> > That draft set of rules appears to make membership hellishly exclusive
> <Snip>
> 
> Refer incorporations law and standard proceedings.
> 

To what do you specifically refer, Brian? State or federal law? Perhaps
the Associations (Incoporation) Act? Which section(s)? Which
"standard" proceedings"? Do you know, to what you refer?

As a past chairman of two separate incorporated organisations, and having
created the constitution for incorporation for one of those organisations,
and having been actively involved in other incorporated organisations, at
the comittee level, prithee clarify to exactly what, you refer.

> > I also note that the organisation appears to exclude interested people who
> > are not currently working as Linux professionals,
> 
> Yes.
> 

Well, that certainly contradicts Colin's response.

> >and thus appears to exclude new blood,
> 
> No.
> 
> > and to not encourage interested people (students, etc),
> 
> Only students are interested people? Or does "etc" mean "everyone else" and
> you just like splitting the world's population into these two categories?
> 

For most people, Brian, giving an example, followed by "etc", usually
means, "this is one instance, and, also, other instances apply". I could,
if you really want, include a list of different possible categories of
interested people, depending on how many screens of examples you
want. Brevity is usually preferred, so, one example category was given,
followed by "etc" (= etcetera).

Your comments above, are decidedly finicky and erroneous.

> > for either membership, or, working as Linux professionals.
> 
> I don't understand how you logically link these together.  Be a Linux
> Professional and then seek to join the Society.

Once again, are you sure you understand the principles of the
organisation? This again contradicts Colin's response.

> PLUG is for interested people no matter what their
> background/history/educational status/profession/etc (where "etc" means
> "anything else").  It is an open and general discussion forum on the topic
> of Linux.
> 
> SLPWA is a Society of Linux Professionals in Western Australia - really, I'm
> not making that up.  It servers a very different role to PLUG, it has
> distinctly different objectives and is by and for people working in the
> Linux industry.
> 
> > >From my experience, it is usual for an inaugural meeting to be held,
> then,
> > suggestions for a charter, or set of rules, and so on, to be discussed, so
> > that the organisation is not created before it has members.
> 
> This has been done.  It was a "Register your interest" meeting and from it
> has emerged the current agenda (many thanks to Jeremy, Colin, Patrick and
> many others).

" "Register your interest" meeting"? That appears to be different to what
happened at the meeting.

How many weeks' notice of the meeting was given, on the PLUG list?

> 
> > Whilst the idea of a society of Linux professionals is a good idea, I
> > believe that this proposal is too exclusive, and, its direction and
> > membership appear to have been decided before the first
> > (official) meeting. It all sounds too covert.
> 
> *sigh*
> Well it's not and if you've been reading this list you possibly would've
> noticed a lengthy thread about "Professional Linux Organisation" in the late
> half of May along with suggestions for a separate mailing list at which
> point the discussions moved from here to there and you think it's covert
> because you couldn't be bothered to sign up for it.
> 

"couldn't be bothered to sign up for it"?

Damnant quod non-intelligunt.

As it was, at the time ("late half of May"), we neither knew of the
mailing list, nor were able to sign up at the time, even if we had known
of it, due to computer problems.

Perhaps, you might remember the part of the Hitchikers' Guide to the
Galaxy, where the Vogon Captain stated that the propsal for the
inter-galactic highway had been on show at alpha centauri for sufficient
time for anyone to read it and object, and that therefore, sufficient
opportunity had been given?

The issue of such an organisation, was an on-again, off-again, thing on
the PLUG mailing list, and, happened to have been decided on, in a
relatively short period, with no discussion on this list (of which I am
aware), in the last couple of weeks, at least.

> Colin's mail was a courtesty to inform PLUG list members of intermediate
> developments.
> 
> 

Only two days' notice of such a meeting? AGM's, and, Special General
Meetings, of incorporated organisations, generally require at least a few
weeks' notice. How much notice was given, of the meeting to which Colin
referred? Was notice of that meeting, posted to this list?

It seems to be advising of decisions that have been made, after they have
been made, rather than of propsals.

Given the above response, and, that it is from an intending to be
committee member, and, as the committee members will apparently be the
only means of determining membership applications, the decision making
process for dealing with membership applications, appears likely to be
purely arbitrary, at least regarding the particular person.

It must be remembered, that the proposed organisation (if it doesn't
already exist) is supposed to be a professional organisation, and,
therefore, the conduct of the organisation, and, the procedures involved,
should be professional. The conduct of an organisation, and, of its
commmittee members, and the procedures applicable to such an organisation,
reflect on its members.

Whilst I am critical of the response above, and, of what appears to have
happened wrt this, at least Colin's response was more useful and
constructive.

-- 
Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia
..............

"So once you do know what the question actually is, 
 you'll know what the answer means."
 - Deep Thought, 
   Chapter 28 of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
 - Douglas Adams, 1988
.......................................