First, of the choices presented, I like Arizona Open Technology Association
the best.  Open Technology encompasses all open endevors, not just
software.  And "AOTA" just rolls off the tougue.  Say it with me now:
"Ay-Oh-Tee-Ay"  It would sound good with a news anchor talking head saying it.

Second, let me make sure I understand how this new NPO AOTA will work:
-It is an umbrella NPO for all open technology groups to use as a resource.
-If PLUG thinks it needs an NPO to do an event, it goes to AOTA to get it
done.
-If AZPHP thinks it needs an NPO to do an event, it goes to AOTA to get it
done.
-If PLUG gets some money donated to it, it belongs to PLUG which can, as an
entity, contribute some or all of it to AOTA.
-If AOTA get some money donated to it, it can use it for whatever needs it
has, including for events not directly connected with PLUG.

So the AOTA is a resource the various open technology groups in AZ can use
when an NPO is needed.

Alan

PS If I keep calling the new NPO AOTA, maybe it will stick as the defacto
standard.  :^)

At 01:05 PM 6/11/01 -0700, you wrote:
>Well, again, if money is given to PLUG for a specific reason, it has 
>nothing to do with the NPO.  They are separate entities.  If there is 
>something that requires an NPO for, it should be considered carefully, in a 
>meeting with the NPO Board and the top people in PLUG.  Don't you 
>agree?  This NPO is being set up so that we can do certain things for the 
>community, not to control PLUG.  Their functions would be different.  In 
>fact, lobbying for laws is not going to be able to be done through the NPO, 
>therefore, we need PLUG to accomplish this.  An NPO cannot lobby for or 
>against bills being presented for laws.  I.E. that's the reason that we all 
>went to an attorney; to seek this kind of legal advice.
>
>Kimi
>
>At 6/11/01 12:20 PM, you wrote:
>>The very reason that you see them having seperate goals is why I think we 
>>need to have separate NPO's I mean I'm sure *most* of the time we'll be in 
>>agreement. But if company X gives money to PLUG then the NPO disagrees on 
>>using that money for something PLUG agrees on. We'll have a problem.  I'd 
>>rather we didn't have to deal with that. Setting up a NPO for Plug would 
>>allow companies to give directly to PLUG. Or if they want more bang for 
>>their buck they can give to the Superset group NPO. But Plug would have 
>>its on budgit to do its own things with. I do agree that it makes twice as 
>>much paperwork though.
>>
>>Carl P.
>>