Re: Notice of Linux Australia 2023 Annual General Meeting (AGM)

Hi Craige,

Apologies I have to clarify, there isn't anything formalised in the way of
a constitutional review, but given the recent discussions on the mailing
list it may be prudent to do so and I would suspect that others may be
thinking the same way. Because changes to the constitution requires more
thought (and more notice before an AGM) I was suggesting that a review of
any changes to the constitution happen after this one as we are running out
of time.

Thanks

Sae Ra


On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 at 10:17, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 09:20:50 +1100, Sae Ra Germaine wrote:
> >    Hi Craige,
>
> Hi Sae Ra :-)
>
> >    Thank you for putting this suggestion forward but to make this happen
> >    would require a Constitutional change as the term President etc are
> >    named titles/terms used in the Constitution
> >    (https://linux.org.au/about-us/constitution/).
>
> Noted. Thank you.
>
> >    If this is something the community would like to see (maybe it's a
> >    "discussion" at the AGM rather than a Motion) then I would recommend
> this
> >    be added to the review of the constitution (to be conducted after this
> >    AGM) which can be voted on at another AGM/SGM.
>
> I'm significantly behind on LA email, so thank you for getting me up to
> speed
> there - I was unaware of the constitutional review and a proposed future
> AGM/SGM.
>
> >    Would this be a valid way forward for you?
>
> I think so. I believe it's worth having the discussion at the AGM to test
> community sentiment despite previous low attendance rates, as I'd rather
> not
> drag changing the titles to Convenor and Co-Convenor into a constitutional
> review if there's no community support for it.
>
> Should there be second for it, it would be good to have it discussed at
> the AGM
> and the sentiment conveyed back to the community, so I know whether to
> include
> it in the review.
>
> So I would still like a motion but I'd now amend it to:
>
> MOTION by Craige McWhirter that after discussion of the merits of changing
> titles from President / Vice President to Convenor / Co-Convenor that the
> meeting chair tests the meeting for consensus that the suggested change is
> worth including in the contistutional review, falling back to a vote if
> consensus is blocked.
>
> If the consensus is that it's worth including in the review, than I'll run
> with
> that through the review process.
>
> Thanks :-)
>
> --
> Craige McWhirter
> Signal: +61 4685 91819
> Matrix: @craige:mcwhirter.io
> Mastodon: @[email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> linux-aus mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to
> linux-aus-unsubscribe-cunTk1MwBs8iFSDQTTA3OBCuuivNXqWP@public.gmane.org

_______________________________________________
linux-aus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/linux-aus

To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to
linux-aus-unsubscribe-cunTk1MwBs8iFSDQTTA3OBCuuivNXqWP@public.gmane.org