Quoting Steve Litt (sl...@troubleshooters.com): > True story. As one of ten founders of a LUG in 1999, and > concerned about some future "evil group" "kidnapping" the LUG, I > convinced everyone to put a very difficult quorum requirement into the > constitution. Everyone was excited about the new quorum requirement: > All of us had concerns because the previous LUG had been a (pretty > darned good, in retrospect) cult of personality. Eight years later, > when LUGs weren't so hip and populated anymore, that quorum requirement > prevented the LUG from electing new officers, essentially killing it.
Out of curiosity, what prevented the aspiring officers from just saying 'Well, that was embarrassing', construing the LUG as deceased, but then construing an entirely new LUG to have been just born that by an astounding coincidence had exactly the same name and meeting place/time but no constitution? ISTR that the only tricky point is ownerships of substantial property, mostly Internet domains but possibly other things, but that could be resolved through a conspiracy to just Do the Right Thing and not look too closely. Am I just too devious, or the 2007 would-be officers just not devious enough? I mean, conspiring to finesse constitution through trickery is admittedly being a Bad Person, but isn't institutional death by misadventure worse? _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
