[wplug-plan] Re: [wplug] Bylaws

[Landefeld, Alex]

That's what we like to see here....

...Discussion!    :)

Personally, I'm for the minimalist approach.  This should be a minimalist
group with rather little structure.  For this type of informal group (given
the pace of technological change, I think informal is best), a minimalist
set of rules provides a simple framework from which (1) people are freed
from maintaining a complex framework, and (2) leaders (I like "lead by
example") can emerge without tyranny.

This approach may not be best for the group....but I still like to think
"informal".  Let's get these guy's arguing about code and GUI's, not
procedures.  :)

..Alex.
 
BTW, sometimes I choose not to >snip<.   :)
-----Original Message-----
From: David Tessitor [mailto:dttessitor at home.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 8:11 PM
To: wplug-plan at wplug.org
Subject: Re: [wplug-plan] Re: [wplug] Bylaws


Actually, RR does provide for exactly that sort of flexibility.  It's used
as
a back up if something unforeseen comes up and an orderly way of proceeding
is needed.  It's sort of a how-to that covers more than you'll probably ever
need to know about, but is nice to have there if you ever do.

You're right we don't need to argue about RR.  But the procedures for
decision making need to be considered as part of bylaws development,
especially if one is establishing something non-standard for process.  Most
groups take a minimalist approach and simply list RR as the parliamentary
process.  Actually, there is a middle ground that is taking a minimalist
approach on the bylaws and using standing rules for procedural
considerations.  Rules are a much easier process to set up and revise, and,
except for some extremely important matters that should be in the bylaws,
are
the best place to deal with most minor procedural issues which are the
majority of matters you might have in mind.  This way we can get up and
going
and make adjustments without a lot of hassle as their needs make themselves
evident.

Discussion on the list of the product from the first three organizational
meetings is a good place to begin.  An agreeable decision and ratification
process can grow out of the list and meeting discussions.

Dave

====================

Jonathan Billings wrote:

> I'm not against RR for business meetings, as long as we modified them to
> be less formal, and cut out some of the cruft that is useless with our
> online capabilities (no need to read the previous meetings minutes, only
> highlights relevant to the current meeting).  But really, what does RR do
> for the LUG?  Not much, because currently, there is no chair/president to
> run the business meetings.  So arguing about RR is pointless.  We need to
> decide on revising the bylaws.

_______________________________________________
wplug-plan mailing list
wplug-plan at wplug.org
http://www.wplug.org/mailman/listinfo/wplug-plan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.wplug.org/pipermail/wplug-plan/attachments/20010213/efa85035/attachment.html