[Auugps] AUUGPS v. Linux Australia v. AUUG continuing

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Monday, 24 November 2008 at  2:08:05 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> My original motivation (brought on by the complete lack of any action on
> others part) was to allow the auug.org.au domain name (and the email
> addresses, discussion lists, web pages and other history associated with
> it) to not be lost in the event that AUUG was forced (or chose) to
> dissolve.

Part of this should be to avoid this fate.

> The secondary motivation is to make it very clear that AUUG as it
> used to exist does not any more.  Having a new name gives us proper
> break and changes peoples expectations about what the organisation
> will be doing.

On this second point I disagree.  The name is important, and at least
in theory the association still exists.

> The main problem we have here (as I see it) is that any body
> that the domain name is transferred to must fulfil the requirements of
> the AUDA to hold the license.  There are two parts, eligibility to hold
> any name, and eligibility to hold that particular name.
> ...
> I think 1. above rules out an individual hold the license of an
> org.au domain. So the advantage of an incorporated AUUGPS is that it
> easily fulfils both parts.

We've already seen multiple related cases (local Linux groups) where
non-incorporated groups have a .org.au. domain.

> Others have suggested Linux Australia.  Having read the Constitution
> of LA and their policy on Sub-Committees, I think this would be
> possible if they would set up AUUGPS as a sub-committee of LA.  A
> sort of historical society, if you will.  I cannot say how the LA
> committee would react to the suggestions, I guess I should put it to
> them.

I tried for years to get a fusion of LA and AUUG.  It failed for many
reasons, but primarily because AUUG does (did) not discriminate
against proprietary software.  If they're prepared to take AUUG on now
(under vastly worse conditions for AUUG), I think this is still an
option.

> You will not that I have not really addressed AUUG continuing as I
> don't think that is a viable options any more.

That's sad.  My alternative was to put it on life support or some
such; effectively the same as what you're suggesting, but without
burning bridges.

Why do we need to change the name?  Lawrie has given some good reasons
for leaving the current setup, though I'm still not convinced that
it's necessary.  But it's also clear that I, as a non-member, have
nothing to say.  I find this discrimination sad at this stage of the
game.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/auugps/attachments/20081124/914fd334/attachment.pgp>