Re: start a new LUG?

[Dave Torrey <tj@xxxxxxx>]

And I'll chime in with my thoughts...

The question this brings up in my mind is whether or not there is enough
interest in the community for its own LUG.  The usefulness is apparent,
and if there is interest, such folks may not wish to be second-class
"members".  It sounds trivial and petty, but personal ownership and
investment are big parts of the success or failure of a club.

What we would be proposing, at a minimum, by sticking with one
organization is:

1) Associate members could not vote.
2) Associate members could not hold offices.
3) Activities, even as simple as catering an event, have requirements
imposed by an outside entity (MTU) because of the funding source.

Another consideration is activity during the summer.  Student groups are
largely (and appropriately) focused on an academic calendar, while
community groups are more-or-less year-round.

I also agree with Phil's comments previously, on the focus of such
groups.  Students have different needs than community members, and
having two coordinated clubs might provide the greatest benefit.  To put
it bluntly, the community does not revolve around MTU, nor MTU around
the community -- but they do depend on and benefit from each other.

That said, if the community lacks sufficient interest, a single club
with associate memberships is the way to go.  That could always change
down the line as needs change.

Dave

On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 11:00 -0400, Kent Frazier wrote:
> Just as an added note to this discussion.  HARO had a clause in their 
> constitution that allowed associate members to be part of HARO.  The 
> associate members had most of the benefits but no voting rights.  I 
> believe the phrasing in the clasue was something like "Associate 
> memberships shall be granted to those students who are not registered 
> students at MTU." This passed the review that student affairs does so I 
> would bet you could do the same with just individuals in the area. I 
> would check with the office of Student Affairs and see what you can do 
> within Tech's legal framework of including the community.
> 
> Kent