On 8/22/07, Bill Sconce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> GNHLUG itself will presumably *not* write letters or try to persuade
> officials of anything.
In the past, people have said that being a "real organization" would
allow us to have people go before law- and policy-makers and say,
"We're here re
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:59:44 -0400
Ed lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Talking to state executive officials, to
> administrative people at all levels of state and local government,
> Selectmen, and School Boards about the advantages of Linux and FOSS is
> not lobbying. Presenting views on legi
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:17:15 -0400
Bruce Dawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See note at end...
> A 501(c)(3)
> organization cannot do any lobbying.
>
Technically, a 501(c)(3) entity can lobby. However, lobbying cannot
represent a substantial part of its overall activities and expenditures.
What
See note at end...
Ben Scott wrote:
> On 8/22/07, Ed lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Actually, I believe I said 501(c)(3).
>>
>
> Ah. Okay. I know someone had said that 501(c)(3) is/had become
> harder to qualify for (i.e., limiting it to more traditional
> charities), and that
On 8/22/07, Ed lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ah. Okay. I know someone had said that 501(c)(3) is/had become
>> harder to qualify for
>
> The form is a little daunting and does require some planning to be done
> in addition.
So, it's just like every other IRS form, then. ;-)
> You ma
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:05:54 -0400
"Ben Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ah. Okay. I know someone had said that 501(c)(3) is/had become
> harder to qualify for
The form is a little daunting and does require some planning to be done
in addition.
>
> Well, I thought I addressed that
On 8/22/07, Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/22/07, Ed lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Actually, I believe I said 501(c)(3).
>
> Ah. Okay. I know someone had said that 501(c)(3) is/had become
> harder to qualify for ...
I've fleshed out my reasoning and research on this a bi
On 8/22/07, Ed lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, I believe I said 501(c)(3).
Ah. Okay. I know someone had said that 501(c)(3) is/had become
harder to qualify for (i.e., limiting it to more traditional
charities), and that 501(c)(6) might be more appropriate. I had
thought it was y
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:34:12 -0400
"Ben Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In the past, Ed Lawson has also spoken on this subject. As I
> recall, he also believed a 501(c)(6) "trade association" was our best
> bet.
>
Actually, I believe I said 501(c)(3). MD has raised the possibility
of50
Ted Roche wrote:
> GNHLUG Webmaster wrote:
>
>> This is an automated email from GNHLUG.
>>
>> New or changed topics in GNHLUG.Organizational, since 20 Aug 2007 - 20:59:
>> - WebHome (BenScott)
>> http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Organizational/WebHome
>> - LegalEntityEIN (BenScott)
>>
On 8/22/07, Ted Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Organizational/LegalEntityType
> Excellent job.
Thanks.
> Let's review it with the board at the next meeting?
That was my intent. I started looking at the subject in detail
because the EIN application
GNHLUG Webmaster wrote:
> This is an automated email from GNHLUG.
>
> New or changed topics in GNHLUG.Organizational, since 20 Aug 2007 - 20:59:
> - WebHome (BenScott)
> http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Organizational/WebHome
> - LegalEntityEIN (BenScott)
> http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki
This is an automated email from GNHLUG.
New or changed topics in GNHLUG.Organizational, since 20 Aug 2007 - 20:59:
- WebHome (BenScott)
http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Organizational/WebHome
- LegalEntityEIN (BenScott)
http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Organizational/LegalEntity
13 matches
Mail list logo
