[UK-TUG] Formal notice of AGM

[Jay Hammond]

@NicolaTalbot

thank you for the constructive suggestions about how to meet.  I think 
the medium is the message; speaker-talks on zoom are not the same as 
chit-chat. Both are desirable, but need different platforms and support 
different numbers of participants. For the former, all 80(ish)  UKTUG 
members could productively meet to hear a talk, and ask a limited number 
of questions. . I'm not clear which software supports chit-chat, where 
the topic moves over time, as do the participants. Could moodle be 
co-opted or is it too heavy a tool/inappropriate?

I certainly think that the social aspect of UKTUG should be maintained, 
but outside UKTUG.  I also think that those UKTUG members who value the 
TeXlive DVD should access it  via Joseph, as he has offered. rather than 
via UKTUG.  I envisage a lightweight "friends of TeX" structure will be 
created independently of the onerous and now inappropriate constitution 
of UKTUG.  Those two behaviours  would maintain the key benefits of 
membership for UKTUG members after UKTUG's dissolution.  It's not clear 
whether the lightweight social structure should be funded by UKTUG.  
Funding transfer  could only happen  pre-dissolution. Discuss please.

These discussions were in committee earlier in the year, and I no longer 
recall if the members were told. If not, it should have been in my report.

jay



On 29/11/2020 14:20, Dr Nicola L C Talbot wrote:
> As mentioned in the minutes, at last year's AGM I raised the question: 
> are we *UK*-TUG (emphasis on UK) or are we UK-*TUG* (emphasis on TeX)? 
> I'd like to re-visit this point, and I think it's helpful to look back 
> at the history of TeX and the digital evolution to evaluate this.

...


In summary:
>
> 1. Regardless of whether or not UK-TUG folds, I'd like to see a 
> continuation of the UK-TUG community (even if it's the "members of the 
> former UK-TUG" community).
>
> 2. If UK-TUG does fold, I believe it's more appropriate for any funds 
> leftover after paying outstanding debts to be given to other TeX 
> organisations, such as TUG or DANTE (the German-speaking TeX user 
> group who fund the Comprehensive TeX Archive Network, CTAN), rather 
> than to UK-specific organisations who have a subset of members who use 
> TeX. In the former case, the funds are more likely to go on TeX 
> (projects or promotion). In the latter case, the funds may well end up 
> being spent on non-TeX areas.
>
> (If disclosures are required when recommending a target for UK-TUG 
> funds, then here are mine: I'm also a member of TUG and I have a 
> number of packages on CTAN.)
>
> 3. If UK-TUG doesn't fold, I believe that the constitution should be 
> updated to allow for a remote AGM in the event of a pandemic, civil 
> disturbances, or any other events outside of the committee's control 
> that prevents members from attending (or simply to allow members who 
> can't attend due to other factors, such as distance to the meeting 
> place, illness or disability). Technology now exists to allow this 
> that wasn't present when the constitution was first written.
>
> Finally, I'd like to thank all committee members, past and present, 
> for their efforts, particularly when juggling a heavy workload and 
> serious illness. Having been on committees for other organisations in 
> the past, I know this is hard work, especially where there is division.
>
> Best regards
> Nicola Talbot

-- 
Email use jay at jjnr.uk