Procedural Issues: was [oclug] Nomination: Dave O'Neill

[Chris Herrnberger]

On Friday 30 March 2001 10:26, you wrote:
>
> See my other post.

Did but not comming in in sequence......:)


 It's not a question of technology. As you point out, we
> could have all our directors living in New York City if technology was the
> only concern. But technology is only a means of achieving things we WANT to
> do. It should never be used just because we CAN.  The kernel analogy is
> somewhat of a red herring, because the Linux kernel is international in
> scope and impact. To this point OCLUG is not.

I hear ya, but were misinterpreting each other due to the time lag of posts. 
My comments and intend were not to open a discussion on the nature, direction 
and evolution of OCLUG vis a via local vs international. (albeit it would be 
interesting) 

No my comments were much more fundamental and were based on a discussion that 
indicated that the quality of service "to" OCLUG is paramount and that the 
quality issue is by nature geographically independent. You will note that in 
the original post I covered this point by suggesting that non local input 
would need to be proportional to local representation in order to have a 
check and balance mechanism. Trust me Burns Im not into imports, but just 
raising a point that I think needs some discussion as many members have made 
valuable contributions to OCLUG and for what ever reason find themselves in 
Vancouver or Toronto or Newfoundland. If they have an interest and are 
capable of making a valued and sincere contribution to OCLUG, the nature of 
their geographic location bears little significance on whether that 
contribution is accepted or rejected by the board or the membership IMHO. The 
criteria for acceptance of an contribution be it financial, intellectual or 
services in kind, need to be evaluated on different criteria.  The discussion 
on the technology component was simply an effort to point out that in terms 
of tools required to facilitate such contributions we already have them but 
use far to few as an organization IMHO

>I suggest that once the charter
> is formally in place, Chris, that you introduce an amendment to that effect
> and it can be put to a vote of the general membership. Something like this
> should be decided by the membership as a whole.

agreed....

Best 

Chris