Yep, it looks like you got it right, Alan.
AOTA can support any open technology group or company. More importantly,
it cah do the advocacy for all of them at one time.
On Monday 11 June 2001 13:32, you wrote:
> 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.
>
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
> post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
--
Jim
(text/plain)