Ubuntu Wiki

Special Bylaw Meeting for New York Team....

Log

TZ UTC-4

[06:00:26 PM] <ausimage> We will review the bylaws.... and maybe get a little into non profits and incorpating...
[06:01:35 PM] <ausimage> hmmm.... again minimal participation :S
[06:01:52 PM] <ausimage> in such an important document....
[06:02:17 PM] <samiam010203> well
[06:02:22 PM] <ausimage> especially for you samiam010203
[06:02:25 PM] <samiam010203> what do u want to do
[06:02:34 PM] <samiam010203> what do u meen ?
[06:03:03 PM] <ausimage> well this document should contain what your vision for the group should be...
[06:03:35 PM] <ausimage> it is like the ship that we will sail... to gain ubuntu mind-share in New York
[06:03:48 PM] <samiam010203> i personaly think the document is fine
[06:04:06 PM] <samiam010203> i leave it into your hands to make it better and get it finalized
[06:04:33 PM] <ausimage> cool... I want to ensure that everyone is comfortable with what is stated....
[06:04:48 PM] <samiam010203> thats why the others should be here :(
[06:04:54 PM] <ausimage> yeah....
[06:05:30 PM] <ausimage> I think the biggest thing is the how the team is incorporated... 
[06:05:57 PM] <samiam010203> ausi , nick is calling u in irc :)
[06:06:05 PM] <ausimage> there are many variations with different 
[06:06:10 PM] <ausimage> yeah I saw that
[06:06:20 PM] Nick Garvey has joined
[06:06:26 PM] <ausimage> hey nick
[06:06:34 PM] <Nick Garvey> okie
[06:06:41 PM] <ausimage> have you looked over the by laws before?
[06:06:50 PM] <Nick Garvey> yeah
[06:06:58 PM] <Nick Garvey> is this one different from the one on the wiki?
[06:07:17 PM] <ausimage> this the latest draft from the wiki...
[06:07:23 PM] <Nick Garvey> okie
[06:07:32 PM] <Nick Garvey> do I need to ask to fix typos?
[06:07:40 PM] <ausimage> fix em...
[06:07:55 PM] <Nick Garvey> does someone need to approve it or such?
[06:08:19 PM] <ausimage> I probably have read these so much I read what I am suposed and not what is there ;)
[06:08:47 PM] <ausimage> no just let us know what is being done 
[06:09:03 PM] <Nick Garvey> is it highlighted in blue for you?
[06:09:07 PM] <ausimage> yeah
[06:09:11 PM] <Nick Garvey> okie
[06:09:27 PM] <ausimage> for interested parties...
[06:09:49 PM] <ausimage> Type A - formed for non-business purpose or purposes, including: civic, patriotic, political, social, fraternal, athletic, agricultural, horticultural, animal husbandry, and for a professional, commercial, industrial, trade or service association.
[06:10:10 PM] <ausimage> that is what is seen as 201a state law
[06:11:23 PM] <Nick Garvey> ok so with dues
[06:11:36 PM] <Nick Garvey> if all the leaders don't want dues, but all the non leaders do, then there are dues?
[06:12:13 PM] <Nick Garvey> well I guess the leaders could just amend the bylaws in that case
[06:12:54 PM] <ausimage> well yharrow changed that a little....
[06:13:28 PM] <Nick Garvey> it just seems strange that just about all other voting things are leadership only
[06:13:40 PM] <Nick Garvey> but dues are desided by members
[06:13:49 PM] <ausimage> oh hmmmm
[06:14:02 PM] <ausimage> perhaps leadership should go there too
[06:14:07 PM] <Nick Garvey> I would think
[06:14:28 PM] <ausimage> this why I want the bylaws reviewed by many eyes ;)
[06:15:18 PM] <samiam010203> ausi why dont we do the by laws when more people are in attendance ?
[06:15:25 PM] <ausimage> If your club is organized for pleasure, recreation, and other similar nonprofitable purposes and substantially all of its activities are for these purposes. 501c7 fed law
[06:16:01 PM] <ausimage> samiam010203 I am skeptical that the level of participation would change
[06:16:05 PM] <Nick Garvey> heh
[06:16:22 PM] <samiam010203> i think if we do it after the next irc meeting we might have more eyes on the prize 
[06:16:37 PM] <Nick Garvey> 17th eh
[06:16:41 PM] <Nick Garvey> mm I'll be at camp
[06:17:06 PM] <ausimage> I have put aside time now... to look at them.... they can be reviewed again then as well... if that helps ;)
[06:17:15 PM] <samiam010203> cool
[06:17:52 PM] <ausimage> Nick anything else catching your eyes....
[06:18:06 PM] <Nick Garvey> oh ok so I can still review it?
[06:18:16 PM] <ausimage> BTW Leadership is the Board of Directors in most orgs
[06:18:18 PM] <ausimage> Yeah
[06:19:20 PM] <ausimage> not sure if the use of Leadership is confusing? Thought Board of Directors was not as 'accessible' a term for our team :)
[06:19:42 PM] <Nick Garvey> as long as the word leadership is defined I think it's good
[06:19:56 PM] <ausimage> make sure I did Nick ;)
[06:20:09 PM] <Nick Garvey> under article 3 section 7
[06:20:13 PM] <Nick Garvey> part b
[06:20:20 PM] <Nick Garvey> it says "Can be terminated from leadership"
[06:20:28 PM] <Nick Garvey> but what process will determine that?
[06:20:55 PM] <ausimage> I think it will be the mood of the rest of the leadership.... 
[06:21:04 PM] <Nick Garvey> what defines "the rest" though
[06:21:10 PM] <Nick Garvey> most other things say "2/3" or "3/4"
[06:21:22 PM] <Nick Garvey> but that doesn't have a specification of how many need to approve of the removal
[06:22:00 PM] <ausimage> hmmmm.... it was shall before... but I thought it might be harsh.....
[06:22:40 PM] <ausimage> perhaps shall should be there?
[06:22:51 PM] <Nick Garvey> yeah
[06:23:05 PM] <Nick Garvey> because I mean there are only four leadership meetings a year
[06:23:10 PM] <Nick Garvey> so if they miss two, that is 1/2 of em
[06:23:21 PM] <ausimage> ok changed,.... :)
[06:23:23 PM] <Nick Garvey> and for a leader, to not give an excuse, that isn't really acceptable
[06:23:23 PM] <Nick Garvey> okie
[06:23:58 PM] <Nick Garvey> annual election meeting, no month desided yet?
[06:24:19 PM] <Nick Garvey> article v, section 2, part c
[06:24:22 PM] <ausimage> not yet... I am waiting for a consensus
[06:24:28 PM] <Nick Garvey> how would they help?
[06:24:35 PM] <Nick Garvey> and "shall" means that membership must?
[06:25:22 PM] <Nick Garvey> seems that would go under the leadership part, perhaps under role
[06:25:25 PM] <ausimage> we were organized in February.... but I think some want a summer date for easier possible travel
[06:25:38 PM] <Nick Garvey> just a note that says that the leaders are guided by the membership etc etc
[06:26:16 PM] <ausimage> for which?
[06:26:26 PM] <Nick Garvey> the part under article v section 2 part c
[06:26:40 PM] <Nick Garvey> seems like it would go under article iii, section 1
[06:27:39 PM] <ausimage> hmmm the intention of that was to say the THIS anual meeting was for elections  AND goal setting by the membership
[06:27:55 PM] <Nick Garvey> ah ok
[06:28:10 PM] <ausimage> make sense? any way to make it clearer?
[06:28:13 PM] <Nick Garvey> so the election meeting is for more than just elections?
[06:29:14 PM] <ausimage> yeah it is supposed to be the Anual meeting found in other by laws...
[06:29:27 PM] <Nick Garvey> article viii seems like it should be part of article iii section 3 rather than its own article
[06:29:47 PM] <Nick Garvey> and I assume.. "hired" should be "appointed"?
[06:30:27 PM] <ausimage> depends on the mood of leadership... it could be a paid position....
[06:31:02 PM] <ausimage> though I would need to check the regs on 501c7 for that....
[06:31:18 PM] <Nick Garvey> paid position? there are no dues or anything yet so how would they be paid?
[06:31:34 PM] <Nick Garvey> and also, this is a small group at this point, it seems silly to pay someone
[06:32:47 PM] <ausimage> well it does not say that we MUST have an Executive Director.... it just give us the option to have one
[06:33:28 PM] <Nick Garvey> mm.. seems unneeded at this point to define a role that is most likely not going to be filled in the near future
[06:34:15 PM] <ausimage> I guess it could be dropped... just will have to be an amendment at some point then
[06:34:19 PM] <Nick Garvey> yeah
[06:34:19 PM] <Nick Garvey> exactly
[06:35:23 PM] <Nick Garvey> okie
[06:35:40 PM] <ausimage> nick I have been waffling on the use of membership and leadership... should they be capitalized... or not ?
[06:36:04 PM] <Nick Garvey> hm
[06:36:10 PM] <Nick Garvey> I wouldn't think so?
[06:36:56 PM] <ausimage> I have also been trying to get those terms straigt without 'the' proceeding....
[06:37:43 PM] <Nick Garvey> fixed
[06:37:52 PM] <Nick Garvey> I removed three "the"s
[06:38:22 PM] <ausimage> yeah I have been going back and forth the best way to state the terms... 
[06:39:23 PM] <ausimage> Nick I want an opinion on additional section under article I
[06:39:54 PM] <ausimage> considering If the corporate name contains a proper name, such as "Friends of ABC University" or "Mary Smith Foundation," you should be aware that section 174-d of the Executive Law makes it a misdemeanor to use anyone's name (including an organization's name) to raise funds without receiving prior written permission.
[06:40:24 PM] <ausimage> I have been contemplating an authorization clause of sorts...
[06:40:41 PM] <Nick Garvey> do you have a link to the law?
[06:41:15 PM] <ausimage> http://www.oag.state.ny.us/business/not_for_profit.html is where I am reading it from
[06:42:07 PM] <Nick Garvey> hm
[06:42:12 PM] <Nick Garvey> well we just need written permission right?
[06:42:42 PM] <ausimage> I think... that is what it means....
[06:42:55 PM] <Nick Garvey> http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy
[06:43:11 PM] <Nick Garvey> Certain usages of the Trademarks are fine and no specific permission from us is needed.
[06:43:22 PM] <Nick Garvey> We share access to the Trademarks with the entire community for the purposes of discussion, development and advocacy.
[06:43:26 PM] <Nick Garvey> we are certainly doing advocacy
[06:44:12 PM] <ausimage> then we also may have the perception of a trade group for Ubuntu 
[06:44:31 PM] <samiam010203> ausi i will see you in the am :)
[06:44:37 PM] <ausimage> sure...
[06:44:39 PM] samiam010203 has left
[06:45:16 PM] <ausimage> those appear to be the biggest state issues...
[06:45:34 PM] <Nick Garvey> it seems that we have written permission from Canonical to use ubuntu for this purpose
[06:45:51 PM] <Nick Garvey> as long as there is no commerical intent
[06:45:55 PM] <ausimage> that is good... I was not sure....
[06:45:56 PM] <Nick Garvey> which there clearly is not
[06:46:57 PM] <ausimage> the big federal issue is c7 vs c3.... I don't want the hassles of proving c3 educational and public benefits...
[06:48:11 PM] <ausimage> though c3 is deductible and c7 is not... our stated purpose and that of a loco seems to me not to reflect the intent of c3
[06:48:55 PM] <ausimage> we are still tax exempt either way ;)
[06:49:02 PM] <Nick Garvey> I would think the path of least resistance would be best at this point
[06:49:16 PM] <ausimage> that is good to hear... :)
[06:50:22 PM] <ausimage> oh well thanks nick for helping today :)
[06:50:35 PM] <Nick Garvey> yup