[LUGSB] LUGSB constitution.

[Jonathan Dehan]

I think we are missing the point. This declaration is becoming too
technical. If what we do cannot be explained in three sentences in layman's
terms, to a reasonable degree of accuracy, there is no way we will get
funding.

Look at the original complaint - too vague and yet too technical. Adding a
preface of definitions is making it way more technical, and having links to
definitions will be ignored and be called 'too vague'. We need to
communicate  the value of LUGSB to the greater campus community, not
perfectly define exactly what we do.

- Jonathan

On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Diane M. Napolitano <dmnapolitano at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Chris Wright <dhasenan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 02/04/2008, Ryan Kaufman <rkaufman at ams.sunysb.edu> wrote:
> >
> <snip>
>
> >
> > There are three issues: explaining ourselves so that we know what we
> > should be doing, explaining ourselves to people in order to accomplish
> > that, and explaining ourselves to people so they can tell whether we
> > are accomplishing that.
> >
> > We already have the necessary technical knowledge.
> >
> > Our constitution will not actually attract any members, no matter how
> > well worded.
> >
> > LUGSB should not be evaluated by someone who cannot look up the
> > definition of Open Source. It will be evaluated by such people, but
> > they will have much more information on us than just our constitution.
> >
> > In this case, I think the appropriate action would be to provide
> > supplementary documentation to the constitution. Or perhaps a
> > Definitions section.
>
>
> A definitions section could work quite nicely as well, and help to make
> the Purpose look neat.  We could even make the Definitions section section
> #0, haha :D
>
> Something like (and BTW, pardon me for not maintaining consistency with
> the style of the existing constitution, I haven't looked at it in quite some
> time):
>
> 0. Defnitions
>     A. The following terms are used throughout this document and their
> meaning is defined as such:
>         1. Free Software - (insert awesome definition here)
>         2. Linux - (insert some semblance of a description here)
>         3. Open Source - (another awesome definition here)
> 1. Purpose
> (Ilya's proposed Purpose could go here)
>
> If USG says "hey the Purpose is supposed to be the first section", a)
> that's ridiculous and b) it is. ;)  As much as I like URLs and references,
> if they can't look up "free software" now, they're certainly not going to
> take the time to follow a reference.
>
> - Diane
>
> _______________________________________________
> lugsb mailing list
> lugsb at mail.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to:
> http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/lugsb
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/pipermail/lugsb/attachments/20080402/53b32c1c/attachment.htm