Re: Some queries to *all* list members

["G.Sagar" <sagarg@xxxxxxxxxx>]

me speaks on behalf of ILUG-Bom (for most part) ....

----- Original Message -----
From: Biju Chacko <botsie@xxxxxxxx>


> 1.Do we need this secrecy?

I dont think so.
But I have consciously kept ILUG-Bom unupdated on the discussions of
this list simply because i am still to see some worthwhile output of the
several discussions going on right now on this list.

> 2. Did this list decide to spend two months talking?

I do not know what you are talking about here !

> 3. How many people want a big, complicated LI ?
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
> What do I know about Calcutta's problems? What does Chennai know about
> Indore? What is the use of a complicated all-india organisation?

Im lost here. What has registering LI as an org got to do with LUG's
knowing each others problems ??

The LUGs
> *must* be completely autonomous.

The lug's *ARE* going to be autonomous. Again, I dont see what this has
got to do with LI registration issue !

> I would like to see replies from *everybody* on this list. The
discussions
> seem to be dominated by three of four people. What about Bombay?
Trivandrum?
> Delhi? Indore? I get the feeling that the rest find this process so
> distastful that they are abstaining.

First, I, in no way, saw any conversation where i could actively
contribute and enhance the quality of discussion. Hence I refrained.
Second, I dont understand why you interpret this abstinance as "finding
the process distasteful" !!!
I have been following each and every thread here closely. I, personally,
will speak only when im sure I have some quality inputs.

> [1] I'm sure PCQ stands to gain from the growth of Linux in India. But
don't
> we all? When our interests co-incide we *should* co-operate.

I would like to know if there has been some off-this-list discussion
about IT.com, PCQ etc etc. I dont see why PCQ is being dragged into
discussions !!

Cheerio,
Sagar.