[plug] Thanks to Daniel and Artifactory; Future Talks; Other Events; Projects; Housekeeping; Feedback

[James Bromberger]

On 9/03/2011 4:17 PM, Tim Bowden wrote:
> Is there any need for PLUG to still be incorporated?  I believe SLUG
> is looking at the possibility of being a subcommittee of LA as an
> alternative to incorporation for when legal/insurance/financial issues
> need to be looked after.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Tim Bowden

Hi Tim,

Thanks for the question. This is something we've been watching very
closely. James Polley, current president of SLUG, is putting a motion to
the SLUG AGM. Its not been ratified by the membership, but its a
reasonable idea. SLUG would (if passed) wind up, give all its assets to
LA, and LA wound then form a sub committee for LA Sydney, appoint two
officers to the sub-committee, and then have elections to the rest of
the sub-committee, from what I recall. LA would/could issue a bank
account for the sub committee. SLUG has been chargin $25/year for
membership, and spending $800/year on insurance (which we haven't been).
LA's insurance would then cover the sub-committee and its activities, LA
would regulate and supply funding. LA will also supply hosting for web
site, mailing list, etc, and admin team to look after this (they've
already offered this to us, but we have our own arrangements already and
have done for many years).

The entity that was SLUG would no longer need its own incorporation,
constitution, Public Officer, mail box, tax returns, etc. SLUG
apparently has around 40 financial members (PLUG is around 33). As to
tax returns; Incorporated bodies in NSW are required to submit tax
returns; PLUG is not currently required to submit tax returns in WA.

This is all very appealing to me, but at the same time, being on control
of ones own destinty, finances, and policy is another. As Linux
Australia is based in NSW, there is a general feel that the overlap
there is great. I spoke with Linux Australia President John Felito
yesterday about this. Apparently the feeling is that Brisbane won't
become a sub-committee; they're too active and independent.

The regional LUGs have nominally and voluntarily come under the umbrella
of LA when LCA has been on; this reorganisation would make this
arrangement more concrete.

Of course, one could say that to run a LUG, you don't need any
administrative overhead; you chose a venue, you get together, and that's
it. The decision taken a long time ago to incoporate offered the
organising participants (who became the committee) some legal
protection, plus gave the organisation a recognised identity so it can
have a bank account, etc. When the world was a much more distributed
place, this was useful. In our ever more connected space we live,
perhaps this is redundant.

>From the committee meetings we have had at PLUG, the desire has been to
take a "wait and see" approach. I suspect that by the end of the year,
we'll have a feel for how successful this is, and what the draw backs
are. At the same time, one needs to consider the advantages of
offloading this overhead, to the advantages of having that structure at
YOUR (PLUG's, the /local /community's) disposal.

*What does the rest of the membership feel about this?* I suspect the
cessation movement that rears its head every few years may have some
bearing here! ;)


  James

-- 
Mobile: +61 422 166 708, Email: james_AT_rcpt.to

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plug.org.au/pipermail/plug/attachments/20110309/47ea8758/attachment.html>