[svlug] ISSUE: SVLUG's continued status with SBAY
bill at wards.net
Wed Feb 22 09:55:21 PST 2006
On 2/22/06, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
> Moreover, I think it's a very bad precedent to remain part of a
> corporation that has twice, in two different contexts on two different
> occasions, threatened behind our backs to remove our elected leader.
> And more recent events have proven that they're not even capable of
> expressing regret over that! (Again, so much for leadership from _their_
Let's be clear on this whole "elected leader" thing. As an unchartered SIG,
the only officer of SVLUG that has any legal standing is "SIG Coordinator"
which is an appointed position by the president of sbay.org. Ian has
graciously allowed SVLUG to choose its presidents for the past three and a
half years, and granted them SIG Coordinator status, to preserve continuity
with SVLUG's traditions. But he is under no obligation to do that, and
could, within the bylaws, remove the SIG Coordinator status from the SVLUG
president and assign it to someone else. We (sbay.org board members) talked
him out of it, out of deference for SVLUG's democratic traditions, but it
would have been totally within his rights to do so. Unless, that is, SVLUG
wrote a charter (in which case it would require a 2/3 vote of the
sbay.orgboard to remove a SIG officer).
Where were you when the sbay.org bylaws were being written and voted on?
Where were you when the sbay.org board members were being nominated and
elected? Why do you care about this only now, after nearly FOUR YEARS of
operating under these bylaws?
Also, SVLUG has never been independent. First it was a branch of Silicon
Valley Computing Society, and then switched to being a branch of sbay.org.
So it can't resume being independent if it never was.
Help bring back the San Jose Earthquakes -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the svlug