[plug] Family membership

[Bret Busby]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Daniel J. Axtens wrote:

> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:36:43 +0800
> From: Daniel J. Axtens <danielax at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: plug at plug.org.au
> To: plug at plug.org.au
> Subject: Re: [plug] Family membership
> 
>> So I propose this:
>> 2 parents and a child or a family type group that is about to pay for
>> fee's of about $25 or more then automatically readjust the fee
>> structure to charge all of them at the child/pensioner rate.
>> ie
>> 2 adults and a child would be $15 instead of $25
>
> So what you're suggesting is that we just create N accounts, selling
> them at a discount rate.
>
> Then the question is, do we need to change the fees, or just make this
> a little easier to do? For example, would just a webpage that allows
> you to create/pay for/renew 3-10 accounts at once be sufficient?
>
> In other words, is there a way to Keep It Simple?
>
> Daniel
>
>

In these times, most people have Internet access, and that tends to 
include a free web site hosting, so I think that is not somuch of an 
issue, nowadays.

To have a Linux shell account, of the nature that used to be provided by 
dialix (the prime purpose of dialix, according to its founder, Jeff 
Johnston (if I have spelt his surname correctly), was supposed to be to 
provide people with UNIX shell accounts, so that they could learn about 
UNIX, while at the same time obtaining inexpensive Internet access), 
could simply be dealt with, by having a single shell acccount per 
membership.

The main purpose of a PLUG membership, I had expected, would be to be a 
financial member of PLUG, so as to be a member of the local Linux 
community, and giving financial members, access to such tangible things 
as the loan items of the PLUG library.

Thus, providing family memberships, at a rate that is cheaper than the 
combined fees for single memberships for each member of a household, 
could inspire and encourage people to participate in the local Linux 
community, through being active members in PLUG.

Thus, the provision of the shell accounts, should be adequate in 
providing one per membership, so that, for example, if the Dagg 
household has a family membership, it could have a shell account with 
the user name dagg on the PLUG shell account server, and, a PLUG email 
address (if that it to be included), of something like 
dagg at plug.org.au, or, daggfamily at plug.org.au . Now, that could mean that 
Fred Dagg, and his wife, Wota Dagg, could equally use both the shell 
account and email account, being provided with the login information.

Now, as concern has been raised, about a single family membership taking 
control of PLUG, by the family members taking all of the committee 
positions, there are two aspects. Firstly, PLUG has (from my 
experience), been fairly informal in its operation, so, rigged votes are 
highly unlikely. Secondly, if concerns are genuine, about a single 
family membership exercising numerous votes to affect the outcome of a 
motion vote, and, taking control of the committee by all faily members 
nominating for different positions on the committee, then the rules 
could be structured to allow no more than one vote per membership, and, 
no more than one committee member nomination, per membership, so that 
Fred Dag and his sons (for those who don't remember, Fred Dagg had seven 
sons, all named Trevor), would be limited to a single vote on motions, 
and, a single position on the committee, so that we don't get President 
Fred Dagd, Vice President Wota Dagg, Secretary Trevor Dagg, Treasurer 
Trevor Dagg, OCM Trevor Dagg, OCM Trevor Dagg, OCM Trevor Dagg, etc, 
and the Dagg family taking all of PLUG's money and fleeing to the 
Bahama's (I think PLUG's money might get someone to Rottnest, but not 
alot further).

And, it should also be remembered that, in terms of a family taking 
numerous positions on the committee, and affecting vote outcomes, there 
is nothing preventing existing households who have single memberships of 
PLUG, for example, the McNally's, voting as a bloc, and, together taking 
numerous positions on the committee. All you need are two such familes 
(or, maybe three), and then you have a bloc controlling PLUG and its 
operations, but, not caused by having family memberships at reduced 
rates.

So, if a rule is to be introduced, to relate to family memberships being 
limited to a single vote per membership, and, a single person nominating 
for committee positions, then that should equally apply to all 
households, to prevent households sufficiently affluent to have all 
members with single memberships, exercising the same amount of control.

What is needed here, is reasonable and objective discussion of the 
issue, and, in the history of PLUG, as far as I am aware, PLUG has not 
dealt with any isssue where bloc voting has been a problem, and, 
elections have not significantly been affected by bloc voting, and, in 
fact, if more than one member of a household, has been willing to 
nominate for committee positions, it has reduced the pressure for people 
who have already served on the committee, and who are tired and want a 
break, from having to nominate yet again, due to the shortfall in 
nominees, as usually happens with non-profit organisations. I can 
remember one organisation in which Anne and I ended up occupying four 
out of seven positions on a committee, because no-one else could be 
bothered nominating.

I am surprised that an organisation like PLUG, that has thus far been as 
informal as it has been, has such a problem with offering family 
memberships at a discounted rate, such as $15, to encourage more 
members, and to encourage participation, with benefits such as a single 
shell account and web site hosting, and email account (if these are to 
be provided as part of membership), per membership. People can easily 
enough, set up sub-websites, such as http://www.plug.org.au/~dagg/Fred 
and http://www.plug.org.au/~dagg/Wota and 
http://www.plug/org.au/~dagg/Trevor1 , etc, under the membership account 
website http://www.plug.org.au/~dagg , if that is the domain name and 
format for web site hosting.

The logistics of the shell account provision  and web site hosting and 
email account provision, at one of these per membership, if these are to 
be provided for financial members, should be easy enough to resolve, 
and, not such a big problem to solve.

The primary issue, should be, "should a family membership class (NOT 
class as in OOP - yech!) be available, at a fee that is less than 
combined single memberships, and, if so, at what fee?".

Then, the other details, if they are so important, can be dealt with.

I reiterate, as meentioned before, that I believe that a family 
membership class should be provided, and that the fee should be the sum 
of the fee for a single adult income earner and a single adult 
concession fee; thus, if the former is $10 and the latter is $5, then 
the class of family membership should be provided, at a membership fee 
of $15 per year. If it is worded so; "the fee for a family membership 
shall be the sum of the fee for a single adult income earner and a 
single adult concession fee", then as those fees get changed (assuming 
they will, at some time), the changes would flow on to the family 
membership fee, without having to change that fee, also.

And, as Forrest Gump was known to say, "And that is all I have to say 
about that" (for now).

--
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:
   A Trilogy In Four Parts",
   written by Douglas Adams,
   published by Pan Books, 1992

....................................................