[LUGSB] LUGSB constitution.

[Chris Wright]

On 02/04/2008, Jonathan Dehan <jdehan at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.

Which essentially means "you're using words that I don't understand,
so I don't know what you're talking about". If we provide definitions,
it'll be a lot more specific, and then we can worry about technical.

And besides, we can work on one aspect, ask them if it's better, and
then ask what we should do about the other aspect.