Re: Release Candidate of the PostgreSQL Europe association statutes

On 13/01/2008, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum <ads(at)pgug(dot)de> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 02:24:39PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > Dave Page wrote:
> > >On 13/01/2008, Gabriele Bartolini <gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >>Ciao Dave,
> >
> > >Otherwise, only the countries with no group of their own (ie. the
> > >direct membership you propose) could vote.
> >
> > Why not just have individual membership in the spirit of SPI?

Because SPI is a mess?

> I go with this for several reasons:
>
> - Why should someone be blocked if he wants to be member in both groups?

For what purpose? If both groups offer end user services such as
newletters and local events, then they are by definition in
competition. If they do it all together, why would I pay twice for the
same thing (even if one membership were free)? Would I get 2 copies of
the same newsletter etc?

> - What about elections, does a country like france now has one
> single vote or has every .fr member a vote for eu elections?

One simple answer is that PostgreSQLFr pay a small percentage of each
members fee for a group membership in PG-EU. Their board are then
awarded that number of votes in PG-EU matters.

I can only see this working effectively if PG-EU operates for users
where there is no regional group, and as an umbrella organisation
where there are. Otherwise there will always be the chance of
confusion, competition, duplication of effort and so on.

Regards, Dave