🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1992Jun27.090742.20799@metapro.DIALix.oz.au> bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au (Bernd Felsche) writes:

>Perhaps some existing associations, which already have
>rules, may find some of AUUG's requirements daunting or
>unacceptable. How many chapters are there at present, and do
>they have formal rules?

My understanding is that none of the existing chapters have any formal
rules.  The Sydney and Melbourne chapters are fairly informal.  The
Canberra chapter wants to become more formal and is looking for the
AUUG framework to do that.  Perth is not currently a chapter, but an
affiliated organisation.

>>- provide the AUUG Management Committee with chapter rules which help 
>>  them track and manage use of AUUG funds.

>This could be construed as undesirable interference from
>AUUG in the chapters. (See my comments about equal subsidies below.)

I don't believe that AUUG Inc should just give money to the chapters
and not worry about it again.  It is the incorporated body, it should
be responsible (see below).

>I don't see any limitation on chapter committee sizes, other
>than the minimum of two.

I agree.  In retrospect I can't see why I suggested a limit, there is
no value in it.

>>- allow members to chose which chapter(s) they wish to belong to.  (If

>>- allow chapters to have "affiliates" who do not join AUUG nationally,

>Sounds familiar.... didn't I mention that some time back?

You probably did.

>People join a chapter, either as a full AUUG member or as a
>chapter affiliate.

>Personally, I'd prefer chapters to receive a per-AUUG-member
>subsidy on an equal basis. I don't think any chapter would
>refuse financial support from AUUG. Distribution of funds
>within the chapter should be left to the chapter.

I agree that distribution of funds in a chapter should be left to the
chapter (provided they are accountable for its proper use).  However I
feel that there should be national support for chapter activities,
pooling of funds so that certain activities can be organised on a
national basis be applied to chapters (e.g. guest national speakers
travelling to all chapters).

>>There are also some problems with affiliates.  How do we ensure that
>>AUUG funds don't end up being used on non-members?  Should we have
>>affiliates at all?

>No problem at all. Let the chapters handle the details.
>After all, why require them to keep AUUG funds in a separate
>pool from those from other sources? Let the chapters set
>their own policies.

>AUUG has enough to do without keeping track of multiple
>financial tracking schemes. The chapter council could advise
>the AUUG Managament Committee of acceptable policies under
>which AUUG funds could be used by the chapters.

Ok.  So the AUUG Management Committee is deciding what are acceptable
uses of funds?  That seems reasonable.  There must be some accounability.

>>A "Financially Endowed Chapter (FEC)" is ...

>>A "Special Interest Chapter (SIC)" is ...

>I believe that the distinction is needlessly complex. Any
>particular reason why an SIC should be "discriminated" against?

I agree it is complex.  I was told that there are existing chapters who
do not want to be bound by all sorts of new rules.  I don't want to
p*ss those people off, the SIC is my way of causing least grief for
them.

If there are no such existing chapters or all the existing chapters
want to become FEC, then we can dump the distinction.   I would
certainly prefer that.

>Why not have people join the chapter they want to, and
>register their interest that way? That way, the chapter is
>immediately aware of the member's status, and can
>immediately start providing services. The chapter would be
>responsible for passing on the appropriate fees and details
>to AUUG.

>Anybody who wants to join AUUG only can do so simply by
>joining AUUG.

>In short, almost nothing changes. The only modification is
>that members joining via a chapter have their details and
>fees passed to AUUG by the chapter. Obviously, chapters
>should not sit on the application forms and funds for too
>long.

>If AUUG so decides, then a chapter member's AUUG subsidy to
>the chapter could be deducted immediately by the chapter,
>reducing unnecessary transfers of funds.

I am not keen on chapters being responsible for handling membership
applications and renewals.  The chapters are run by volunteers, they
may get too busy to collect the money and maintain all the paperwork.
The AUUG Secretariat now seems to be handling this function reasonably
efficiently.  They get paid to perform the service.  If they don't
perform, they don't get paid.  A volunteer's ability to perform waxes
and wanes for all sorts of different reasons.  I would not like us to
go back to the bad old days when membership applications and cheques
sat around somewhere for months (or even worse got banked and then
"lost").

>Why all these rules? Sure, you can use them as a guide to
>see if an association is acceptable as a chapter, but in
>essence, I believe that they construe unnecessary
>interference in the running of chapters.

If AUUG is going to hand out money to chapters, then there must be
rules on what you can do with the money and for accountability.  That
accountability must go back to the constitutionally recognised
management authority for AUUG (the management committee).

>If the chapter
>is already incorporated in another state, laws in the
>various states may prevent such a relationship.

There is no reason for a "chapter" of AUUG to be incorporated in its
own right.  In fact I am not sure if it is legal (I am assuming you are
using "incorporate" in its legal sense here).  By being a chapter of
AUUG the liability of people running the chapter should be covered by
AUUG's incorporation.  That is provided that the chapter is legally
constitued as defined in AUUG's constitution.

Having the chapter incorporate probably makes it an affiliated
organisation rather than a "chapter".

Thanks for the comments.

Peter