LoCo governance and incorporation policy?

[Sridhar Dhanapalan]

On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, "Matthew East" <mdke at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On 01/09/2007, Matthew Copple <mcopple at kcopensource.org> wrote:
> > 2. Would the community recognize a loco that had an independent, legal
> > existence? Right now, the Community Council (which I understand is the
> > sponsoring organization for the LoCo movement) really doesn't wield any
> > particular control over individual LoCos, except for the power to
> > approve them; therefore, it would seem to me that there would be no
> > conflict, at least as the system is currently set up. However, does the
> > Community Council intend on exercising more closely held control over
> > LoCos in the future, and if so, would incorporation interfere with those
> > plans?
>
> When this suggestion has arisen in the past, as far as I know our
> policy on local teams setting up unincorporated associations or even
> incorporated associations has been that it be strongly discouraged.
> Although the issue hasn't been discussed in detail recently as far as
> I know, personally I would remain of that view.

We had this debate over a year ago in Ubuntu-Au. We came to realise that 
maintaining any kind of official association would introduce an 
administrative burden that could threaten to turn a fun community project 
into a chore.

The moral: keep things loose, keep things fun :)


-- 
Your toaster doesn't get a virus. Your television doesn't get a virus.
Why should your computer? http://www.linux.org.au/linux
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/loco-contacts/attachments/20070910/8f786970/attachment.pgp