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

[Colin Muller]

On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 12:22:48AM +0800, wayne wrote:
> C.>And I expect the two organisations will have a very large overlap of
> members.
> C.>But your questions are about SLPWA matters, not about PLUG.
> 
> THAT'S the part that worried me when I looked a little further.
> Who said there would be an "overlap" of [PLUG] members?

I did, in the lines you quote above. It's not a reqirement, but it
seems likely given Linux and OSS as common interests. No-one's in a
position to make it a requirement. There was talk at one point of
including PLUG membership in the SLPWA membership fee, as one way in
which SLPWA would support PLUG (and hence Linux). But, and I can't
repeat this often enough, SLPWA is forming tomorrow, it does not yet
exist, so a decision on that has not yet been taken, and of course it
could only be taken with PLUG's consent. And you can influence these
decisions by taking part in SLPWA discussions.

> C.>I anticipate that SLPWA will continue to notify PLUG of its events,
> C.>because they may be of interest to PLUG members.
> 
> ????
> Or is the [PLUG] membership of interest to SLPWA?   (:o^)
> We, the membership need to get this ABSOLUTELY clarified.
> Is clarification possible?  Or is it too murky in the space between the two
> organisations?

I'm not clear on what you're asking here. SLPWA was formed in part
because people did not want to muddy PLUG with commercial activity,
but felt a need for a forum in which they could engage in and talk
about their commercial activities related to Linux. There are other
reasons, other needs which PLUG is not in a position to meet (either
financially or because they are not within PLUG's aims[1]), and these
are stated in the SLPWA aims. As far as I am aware, everyone involved
in the formation of SLPWA is subscribed to this list; whether they are
PLUG members, I do not know. Do those points answer your question? If
not, could you re-phrase? I do feel as if I'm saying the same things
over and over again, in a way which is muddying PLUG with non-PLUG
issues. Also, everything I'm saying is pretty much self-evident to
anyone who reads the Rules of the two organisations and in discussions
already in the PLUG archives, so I'm a bit puzzled that I'm needing to
say it all again.

> I responded at that time and have heard nothing since.
> Was that when my eMail was not "routing" through my ISP?

I'm not in a position to answer that. If your ISP wants to email me
their log files, I may be able to :-)

[1] "To educate interested parties about the features of the Linux
computer operating system. To facilitate discussion about the Linux
computer operating system, and to share Linux resources amgonst
interested parties": http://www.cantech.net.au/plug/Rules.html

Colin