[wplug-plan] Making the big changes

[Pat Barron]

As an organization, WPLUG must operate within it's bylaws - we owe this 
to the dues-paying members of the organization who voted to adopt the 
current bylaws.  I agree that the current bylaws are an impediment to 
sweeping, fundamental change - but to some extent, that's by design.  
One of the purposes of bylaws such as this in a membership organization, 
is to prevent a small, but vocal, minority from essentially "hijacking" 
the organization, and to prevent money and/or technology from being a 
"barrier to entry" in terms of having a voice in the organization.  Now, 
we know that's not what's going on here.  But I guess my point is, the 
apparent "inertia" of the organization, the built-in resistance to 
change, and the (current) requirement that significant actions be taken 
in the forum of an in-person meeting, are a safeguard, and aren't 
something we can ignore when it's convenient to do so - even if it 
appears to make sense to do so.

But the good news is - making fundamental changes does require broad 
member *agreement*, but does not actually require broad and active 
member *participation*.  Any member, or group of members, can propose 
changes to the bylaws, or even propose that the bylaws be replaced 
outright.  Proposing such changes (or just getting together with folks 
to talk about what changes you'd like to propose) doesn't require the 
approval of the membership, or of the WPLUG Board, and any interested 
parties can come together to do it.  If enough of the current, 
dues-paying members of the organization agree that the proposed changes 
are a good idea (by virtue of a vote), even if they weren't actively 
involved in crafting the changes at hand, then it becomes so.  The 
bylaws, at the very least, anticipate their own modification, even if 
there's a somewhat high barrier to change. And really, it's only 
"somewhat high" - I think at last count there were 17 members - if you 
can get 12 of them to say "yes", then you can make changes as sweeping 
as tossing out the current bylaws entirely and replacing them with new 
bylaws, or even an entirely different form of governance.  You don't 
need the WPLUG Board's permission, or even participation, to do so...  
Remember, at the end of the day, WPLUG is about it's members, and what 
it's members want.

I can suggest two ways to begin an undertaking such as the 
"Constitutional Convention" you propose.

1)  We can (and I say "we" counting myself not as a Board member, but as 
a member of WPLUG and an individual who wants WPLUG to thrive and 
succeed) gather up a group of likeminded individuals (who may nor may 
not even be WPLUG members), and meet on our own via whatever mechanisms 
we find most productive, completely outside of the existing WPLUG 
infrastructure.  We can, in our own way, hash out a set of proposed 
changes, and upon completion, a member can take the results of that work 
and present it to the membership as a proposal.  The advantage to doing 
it this way is that you're completely unfettered by pretty much 
anything.  It's totally "do your own thing", the only time you hit the 
existing bylaws is when you finally present a proposal to the membership 
for approval.

2)  A member of the WPLUG board could propose creating a committee for 
this purpose.  I can't speak for the rest of the Board (either the 
current, sitting board, or the newly elected board that hasn't yet been 
seated), but I can say that I'd be willing to advance that proposal, to 
vote in favor of it, and advocate that the Board appoint anyone to that 
committee who expresses an interest in being on it (remember, you don't 
actually have to be a member of WPLUG to serve on a committee).  The 
advantage of doing it this way is that you can get a budget from the 
WPLUG treasury to pursue the work, to the extent that it's necessary 
(and to the extent that the Treasury can absorb the expense).  So, for 
instance, if the committee wanted to reserve meeting space over a 
weekend at WSCC, just to have a "place to go" to pursue their work, that 
could potentially be covered from the WPLUG treasury.  The down side is, 
working within the existing infrastructure, the members of the committee 
serve at the pleasure of the Board, and would have to report on their 
activities to the Board just like any other committee (after all, if you 
ask for a budget, the Board wants some reassurance that you're actually 
doing something....).  The end result, though, is the same - the final 
work product of the committee would be a set of proposed changes that 
are presented to the membership for approval.

Does that seem sane?

--Pat.