On Tuesday 14 August 2001 19:34, you wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 02:26:08PM -0400, Smitty wrote:
> > Bill,
> > I would advise you to impeach the offending mdlug officers. Get a
> > Robert's Rules of Order and motion for an impeachment vote at the next
> > meeting. You can actually take over the meeting legally under such
> > circumstances. A last resort would be to abandon that one and start
> > another that is truly open source oriented. I suppose you could just
> > give the ms people credible misinformation, but this would take some
> > coordination and agreement of all the attendees. If you have a real
> > "fifth column" running that lug, then they need to be ejected.
> > Smitty
> >
> > > Smitty, Tom is a personal friend. I have dined with him and been
> > > a guest at his house on a couple of occaisions. We have spoken
> > > at length on personal topics unrelated to Linux. But he is
> > > probably not the guy to go to for direct, concise answers.
> > >
> > > I, personally, am spearheading the "anti-MSFT-meeting" drive on
> > > MDLUG. My already fragile popularity index is suffering
> > > mightily. <chuckling heartily!> I consider this an indication
> > > that I am on the right track. Proponents of the meeting are
> > > presently at the stage of villifying the messenger (me). I
> > > suspect this is because they have not been able to answer a
> > > couple of pointed questions:
>
> <snip>
>
> > > It is beginning to feel like late summer, 1938.
> > > http://library.byu.edu/~rdh/eurodocs/uk/peace.html
> > > http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/munich1.htm
> > > http://history.acusd.edu/gen/WW2Timeline/Prelude11.html
>
> Bill, this is very well put. (Careful with the allusions to the Germans,
> though; there's that little rule about losing arguments, you know.)
> FWIW, should _we_ ever be approached by MSFT, _I_ won't sanction such a
> meeting. And if we were to meet with them, I would do as Smitty
> suggests: and feed them credible misinformation.
>
> BTW Smitty, the Robert's Rules of Order ploy only works if the group
> recognizes those rules. We don't, so you'll have to think of something
> else for SLUG. ;-}
>
> Paul
That's a good point, Paul. When I was chairman of the libertarian party in
this county, I wrote policies which made Robert's Rules unnecessary, but I
put a proviso in the bylaws that we could use them only after a affirmative
majority vote of the Executive committee and there was a copy that was
accessible to all execom members.
Alas, that worked well but the all new execom scrapped all the former bylaws,
including those legacy ones we received from the state party. Now, they are
back to the old confused, low attendance meetings where nothing gets done.
They are actually meeting now at a phone sex business on Icot Blvd. ! Only
one member of the old execom attends and this fellow is a very lonely type.
Oh well.
Smitty
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:23:46 EDT