[AUUG-Talk]: Any progress on continuing as an unincorporated organisation

[steve jenkin]

Christopher Vance wrote on 17/1/08 11:42 AM:

Chris,

Your response doesn't move the conversation forward, nor does it answer
any questions.

Your "put up or shut up" comment doesn't answer any question and is not
helpful in any way.
I didn't stand for a board position because I judged I couldn't deliver
to the standard required - it wasn't ignorance, apathy/indifference or
sabotage. I offered to replace Liz for $20,000/year - something I
*could* deliver and probably be a darn sight cheaper and better value.

Your insistence that "I didn't agree to it, so it didn't happen" doesn't
cut it for me.

The AUUG Board has failed in its Governance:
- that one Board made an agreement that wasn't recorded and not passed
on - only reflects on the various Boards
- that you as representative of the current board have not publicly
stated "I'll look into this", I find surprising
- that you imply that CAUUG should've distrusted the AUUG Board so much
as to insist on a formal Trust Agreement, I find equally incredulous. 
When did we start to need paranoia internally?
- the facts of this whole malarkey is trivially resolved - the Treasurer
only has to look at the AUUG bank account for a transaction for around
$20,000 . Around 2001-2002 - I can't remember and don't have the CAUUG
bank accounts. If the AUUG Treasurer doesn't have those bank records,
that's damning comment on the diligence standards. [Which in and of
themselves should've been reported to the membership]

What money there is, is what there is. That can't be changed.

Appropriating specifically earmarked money, especially when its been
brought to your attention, is poor form to me.

I'd like the Board to:
- confirm that the transaction took place
- acknowledge the arrangement with CAUUG
- make a proposal to CAUUG in the light of that.

This is about the AUUG Board honouring an undertaking and allowing CAUUG
the option to decide how its funds might be handled.

As the subject of this thread says:
    *Continuing* AUUG is an option.

Retaining assets if it continues as an unincorporated body would seem
very wise to me.
I'm sure CAUUG members & committee would be happy to give all/some funds
to that cause - *if* they were asked.

> On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 10:47:44AM +1100, steve jenkin wrote:
>> It definitely raises Governance issues about the AUUG Board spending
>> money it didn't have the rights to.
>
> Well it may be that the money you're talking about wasn't considered a
> trust.  Or that the Boards of the times since then may not have been
> aware of such a deal.
>
>> Comments other than 'Whoops, too bad'?
>
> You have had many opportunities to nominate for a board position (more
> than one call in each of the last few years and at least once every
> other year).  Each opportunity you chose to let others do the work of
> governance.
>
> I do know you have offered your services in other ways, so I'm not
> trying to talk nasty, but you get the people you vote for, and they're
> a subset of the people who're willing to do the job.  You can't
> complain about competence levels if you've artificially limited the
> pool of available resources.
>


-- 
Steve Jenkin, Info Tech, Systems and Design Specialist.
0412 786 915 (+61 412 786 915)
PO Box 48, Kippax ACT 2615, AUSTRALIA

sjenkin at canb.auug.org.au http://members.tip.net.au/~sjenkin