[uktug-committee-public] An AGM motion concerning future of UKTUG.
jay at jjnr.uk
Thu Oct 31 19:15:40 CET 2019
The following AGM motion has Draft status.
Once it is formally submitted and published, it cannot easily be withdrawn.
As I am willing to consider changes, it can't be published as submitted yet.
I consider it to be a single motion with three linked parts.
For instance, clause 5 makes no sense if clauses 3 and 4 are removed.
The numbering is for historical reasons and is subject to change.
(don't worry that I do not start at 1 )
3. That the incoming committee give details to members within three
months of how UK-TUG continues to operate in accord with the
4. That the incoming committee give details to members within three
months of how UK-TUG continues to promote TeX use, particularly with
reference to the community beyond current members.
5. That if the incoming committee is unable to address actions from
clauses 3 and 4, the committee will call a special general meeting
(SEGM) to take place between 80 days and 110 days after the AGM. The
SEGM should consider a motion to dissolve UK-TUG plus other motions
which may be tabled in the fashion described by the Constitution. The
motion to dissolve must include details of how UK-TUG material will
be archived and where residual funds will be distributed.
In committee I have urged the committee to develop a plan to revive UKTUG, and a plan to dissolve UKTUG, both plans to be given our best efforts, and
put before the members. Neither plan has made good progress. We have spent a considerable time looking at the constitution, and I think there are two outstanding issues at least one of which could render the AGM unsuccessful.
I have thought about UKTUG's data retention policy as well as what to do with the assets, should it come to dissolution. Dante would be my recipient of choice for the Assets. These details need to be outlined but not finalised in the dissolution motion.
Reluctantly, I think we need more time to work on the plans. But not another whole year. If UKTUG committee can't get a revival plan together by spring, there clearly isn't the energy available to implement it.
I think David Carlisle makes some good points in his motivation.
I cannot see that there needs to be a UKTUG to ensure a few members get DVD's, or for a few different members to meet annually. In both cases I wish to emphasise "few". Not 80 (approx all members) . Nearer 8. Maybe 15?
Those are all the benefits the members get. And the overhead of running UKTUG is substantial due to the friction in discussions and decision-making.
I believe discussing a dissolution motion at the AGM is/should be a separate thread.
Email use jay at jjnr.uk
More information about the uktug-committee-public