On Apr 18, 2006, at 3:40 PM, Ben Scott wrote:
I believe that, when it comes to advocacy, there should be legal entity separate from GNHLUG.
To my mind, GNHLUG is an organization that provides an infrastructure for members to meet, confer, network and create projects. Advocacy for or against the use of software in any specific situation, be it government, schools, private industry or homes is the position of an *individual* and not an official stance of the organization. GNHLUG can provide *education* about Linux and FOSS but does not advocate a particular position. No one within GNHLUG is granted the right to claim to speak for the organization.
If you would like to form a Political Action Committee to lobby for legislative action requiring the consideration of FOSS in all government contracts, go for it, and feel free to mention what you are doing on the GNHLUG forums. (And where I can sign up!)
If a school or government is considering FOSS and would like to learn more about that, we're a great organization to contact to put them in touch with *individuals* who can inform them and offer them that *individual's* opinions.
From the proposed Articles (ref: http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/ view/Organizational/ProposedArticlesOfAgreement):
"The objectives for the organization are primarily to provide the basic structure and support for meetings and social events for all who are interested in Linux and related software and to provide the resources and infrastructure needed to help its members engaged in educational programs about and providing free assistance to users of Linux and related software."
Note that I am *NOT* saying GNHLUG should not be an incorporated legal entity. I think there should be a legally-enabled "GNHLUG". I'm just saying that advocacy should be done under the name of a separate entity.
I don't think that anyone should claim to represent the opinion of GNHLUG as there ain't no such beast.
By "advocacy", I mean going to law-making sessions, or to school board meetings, or business seminars, or whatever, and telling people they should use FOSS.
I'd encourage GNHLUG members to be active in local politics and to make their opinions known.
On the other hand, if we create a separate group for purposes of advocacy, we can put some explicit goals in the charter from the get-go. Anyone who doesn't agree with those goals is free not to sign-up. Thus bypassing the whole consensus problem.
If we want to hire lobbiests and a swanky office and fund print fancy brochures, then that is likely to be a separate organization. If we (*individuals* who just happen to be members of GNHLUG) choose to appear before the legislature or our local school committee, we should be clear that we are acting on our own, and not as a spokesperson of GNHLUG.
This may have additional legal benefits as well. From what Ed has said, 501(c)(3) groups are "better" in terms of receiving donations, but have more restrictions on what they can do in terms of political activism.
Well, md's expressed concern that 501(c)3 may be unreachable at the moment. And perhaps less desirable, in some respects.
My inclination is to try for the NH registration first, then see if we can sort out a decent set of rules and establish a bank account and a membership list and hold an election. If we get that far, we can continue to research the steps for federal status. First, let's become SOMETHING, and build up some history with minutes and financial records. We can watch how the winds blow (and perhaps shift) and determine what course we ought to sail and what beachhead we ought to aim at.
Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com _______________________________________________ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org
