On Sep 27,  4:21pm, Derek Neighbors wrote:

> > > 1) That there be created the following offices:
> > >    * Chairman
> > >    * Vice-Chairman
> > >    * Secretary
> > >    * Treasurer
> > 
> > Do we really need that many offices?  Wouldn't it be more efficiently
> > handled by only one or two people?
> 
> I think this pretty boiler plate, you could possibly trim the vice-chair
> out, but I think a group of four is ok.

The fact that it looked pretty boiler plate is exactly why I objected.

Do we need a treasurer?  We don't have dues, so we don't really have
any money to keep track of, do we?  For those rare events where money
is somehow involved, I should think that another officer could deal
with it.

What would the secretary do?

I was thinking that chairman and vice-chairman - the latter would serve
as a back up for presiding over meetings - would be enough.

> > > 3) That a formalized "membership" be created.  No dues shall be
> > > charged, to become a member you have to create a gpg signature and
> > > have it signed at a meeting.  These signatures will be entered into a
> > > database for use in 4 below. (This one is important to me. ;D)
> > 
> > Why do you think we should have a formalized membership?
> 
> I think formalized membership is good, as it helps in planning for events
> and such.  If you have phone list or such or can email fliers for events.
> (of course giving such information would be optional)

We already have a list of email addresses.  I guess it'd be okay to
associate a real name with each address.