[Talk] Re: [AUUG-ANNOUNCE]: AUUG moving forward
miles.goodhew at antlimited.com
Thu Mar 21 23:09:10 EST 2002
Glenn Satchell wrote:
>>From: Greg Rose <ggr at qualcomm.com>
>>(There are probably legal wrinkles to be
>>worked out regarding incorporation as an association, but I'm sure we could
>>find 20 people to pay $1 per year for membership, or whatever it takes.
I like the idea of changing the organisation in this direction. There's
really no logical need to keep a lot of the "tangible" components of the
organisation _for their own sake_. Otherwise we might end-up paying
directors fat salaries, hiring Nick Whitlam, introducing a "membership
rewards points scheme" - all just so the organisation becomes larger,
more cashed-up and substantial. Which is simply not what AUUG is about
That's not to say that AUUG should simply "downsize" itself- I prefer
reading AUUGN on paper (got to keep those evil trees at bay, after all),
but I'd still be happy enough if the same well-edited information was
> You make, say, $1 out of the conference fee go towards membership, that
> way you don't have the overhead of collecting it separately. But you
> let anyone sign up for the mailing lists.
I think it's a noble idea, but it might be a bit restrictive on people's
"freedom not to associate" - you might want to sit-in on a speech
without joining AUUG.
Anyway, another 2c spent.
More information about the Talk