[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Subject Index][Thread Index]
Re: Thoughts about constitution
- To: li-reg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Thoughts about constitution
- From: Sudhakar Chandra <thaths@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 09:48:08 -0700
- Organization: A Doubleplusgood Mega Corporation
- References: <20000825131924.A16583@sharmas.dhs.org> <20000827102717.D328@darkstar.vsnl.net.in> <20000826224414.A20953@sharmas.dhs.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Prabhu Ramachandran proclaimed:
> (1) Why do we need a national level body?
> If it is to just keep in touch, no formality is required. We can
> just have a dedicated mailing list. If the need arises issues can
> be settled there.
One overwhelming sentiment that I heard when I visited some ILUGs in India
almost a year ago was that thew LI mailing lists have too much traffic and
that many people were subscribed to the ILUG m.l. and not LI.
> If it is to manage national linux related events, well, that is
> rather hard. I'd like to think of LUG's as more informal groups.
The basic idea behind LI, IMO, is to have a national body that can
co-ordinate large nation-wide events. Perhaps even be the equivalent of
Linux International. The local ILUGs staying informal groups is probably
what is going to happen. But one major problem would be the interaction
between the local, informal ILUG and the national, formal LI. The
representative of the ILUG in the national LI should be aware of the
different modes of operation,
> As one member at ILUGC put it, some of us would like to think of
> LI/Local LUG's as clubs of people who share a common passion for an
> open source (put your favourite choice of words here) OS. Putting a
> formal body seems to destroy that spirit.
If a local ILUG thinks that formalizing itself is not needed, then it
should have the freedom to be remain informal. But, as I have indicated,
problems might arise if / when things have to be coordinated with the
national body. Also keep in mind that if ILUG-C does not register itself
as a formal body, some "rougue" (for lack of a better word) ILUG-C might be
registered by someone wanting to make a quick buck / have free PR.
> (2) I think some of us need some history lessons. :) Why did this
> deal of creating a non profit organisation come up at all?
It came up after last year's experience with IT.com where a need for a
national face for LI was felt.
> (3) What is wrong currently? What problems do we foresee??
Take the case of the domain linux.or.in (or something like that). This
domain was registered by a for-profit company. If a national LI existed,
this body could have formally asked the for-profit company to hand over the
> (a) Do we have issues between LUGs right now? Or do we foresee ones
> in the future?
The biggest issue I see between the LUGs is distrust. There. I am going
to come out and say it:
Various LUGs think that ILUG-Blr is assuming the role of a national body.
Some people in ILUG-Blr have expressed concern that Linux Delhi (not
ILUG-Delhi ;-) has plans to form a formal body by itself and take the
reigns. Others have expreses distrust about ILUG-Bom. A few others have
complained about the Linux India booth at last year's IT.com also having
flyers from a certain commercial Linux interest.
Honestly, all this distrust makes me want to throw my hands up and throw
away all this.
> (b) Are we ever going to organize events on a huge national scale as
> LI? i.e. Is LI going to organize a national event on linux?
PS: Sorry for bringing these things up in this week. I just wanted to get
my 2c in. Let us work on the constitution.
"Movies aren't stupid. They fill us with romance and hatred and revenge
fantasies. 'Lethal Weapon' showed us that suicide is funny."
-- Homer J. Simpson
Sudhakar C13n http://www.aunet.org/thaths/ Lead Indentured Slave