+1 and thank you to the "doers!"

Tim

On 7/24/17, 10:02 PM, "Code for Libraries on behalf of Kim, Bohyun" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:

    And as you may have guessed, it's already in the works. Voting coming soon from LPC +Program Committee +FCIG. 
    
    Bohyun 
    
    
    > On Jul 24, 2017, at 9:42 PM, Tim McGeary <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
    > 
    > +1.
    > 
    > And as a past Conference Chair (2014), I am happy to assist in a process or
    > be a source of information, as needed and appropriate.
    > 
    > Tim
    > 
    > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 9:39 PM Matt Sherman <[log in to unmask]>
    > wrote:
    > 
    >> I would second (well at this point third) your proposal Andromeda.
    >> 
    >>> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 9:34 PM, Roy Tennant <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
    >>> 
    >>> All for it. Let's call the question, as you have put it so well. Fire up
    >>> the voting machine!
    >>> Roy
    >>> 
    >>> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Andromeda Yelton <
    >>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
    >>> 
    >>>> In my experience on the LITA board (which Code4lib most emphatically is
    >>>> not), there are sometimes discussions where all the substantive issues
    >>> have
    >>>> been put on the table but we have not managed to make a decision, and
    >>>> eventually I realized that is because unstructured discussion is not a
    >>>> mechanism for making decisions. In the LITA context, the remedy for
    >>>> indecisiveness is to *call the question* - to put a motion on the table
    >>> and
    >>>> make a vote happen, because votes, unlike discussions, are decisions.
    >>>> 
    >>>> I believe this discussion has already put the substantive issues on the
    >>>> table, and Code4lib is failing to reach a decision - the same decision
    >> it
    >>>> failed to reach last year - because it lacks a mechanism for calling
    >> the
    >>>> question; discussion thus eventually peters out without a mechanism for
    >>>> closure. Do-ocracy has been, and I hope and expect will continue to
    >> be, a
    >>>> fantastic means for Code4lib to produce deliverables - conferences,
    >>>> journals, discussion spaces, codes of conduct - but those are all
    >>>> situations where self-nominating do-o-crats speak for the *project*,
    >> for
    >>>> the deliverable, and not for the governance of the community as a
    >> whole.
    >>> I
    >>>> don't think any one of us, or even defined group of us, has the
    >>> legitimacy
    >>>> to speak for us all in that way.
    >>>> 
    >>>> So we are...not making decisions about governance because we lack a
    >>>> governance structure with which to make decisions?
    >>>> 
    >>>> That said, I have seen an actual decision-making mechanism proposed in
    >>> this
    >>>> discussion: fire up the diebold-o-tron and vote on incorporation/do
    >>>> nothing/fiscal sponsorship (with a second vote, if needed, to choose
    >>> among
    >>>> sponsors). This seems like a very *Code4lib* way of doing things.
    >>> Assuming
    >>>> we reached some quorum (to put a number on the table, say "70% times
    >> the
    >>>> number of posters to the list in the last year"), is there anyone here
    >>> who
    >>>> would not find the outcome of that decision to be legitimate?
    >>>> 
    >>>> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Kim, Bohyun <[log in to unmask]
    >>> 
    >>>> wrote:
    >>>> 
    >>>>> Jonathan is right, Cary. I am on this year's LPC for the next year's
    >>> C4L
    >>>>> conference at DC, and we are already working with DLF as a fiscal
    >>>> sponsor.
    >>>>> No legal entity status was required.
    >>>>> 
    >>>>> Bohyun<http://www.hshsl.umaryland.edu/>
    >>>>> 
    >>>>> 
    >>>>> ________________________________
    >>>>> From: Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of
    >>> Jonathan
    >>>>> Rochkind <[log in to unmask]>
    >>>>> Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 6:18 PM
    >>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
    >>>>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Governance for Code4Lib (was: What's so bad
    >>> about
    >>>>> bylaws?)
    >>>>> 
    >>>>>> The bottom line is that we need some sort of entity if we want
    >> enter
    >>>> into
    >>>>> an agreement with a fiscal agent or sponsor. Otherwise, there is no
    >>> "we”
    >>>> to
    >>>>> enter into said agreement.
    >>>>> 
    >>>>> I've said this before and I'll keep saying it, this is not true that
    >>> you
    >>>>> need a legal entity to have your project fiscally sponsored by a
    >> fiscal
    >>>>> sponsor. I know of many projects (not library related, generally
    >>>>> 'charitable') which become fiscally sponsored without having any
    >> legal
    >>>>> incorporation or other legal entity. The project is legally a project
    >>> of
    >>>>> the fiscal sponsor.
    >>>>> 
    >>>>> It is very common. It is a common way for "charitable" projects to
    >>> start
    >>>>> out, without legally incorporating at all, perhaps to legally
    >>> incorporate
    >>>>> and separate from the fiscal sponsor at a later date.
    >>>>> 
    >>>>> If the people we are talking to for fiscal sponsorship are fine with
    >>>> this,
    >>>>> it is a common thing.
    >>>>> 
    >>>>> Jonathan
    >>>>> 
    >>>>> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Cary Gordon <[log in to unmask]>
    >>>> wrote:
    >>>>> 
    >>>>>> This is what the FCIG has been working on.
    >>>>>> 
    >>>>>> The bottom line is that we need some sort of entity if we want
    >> enter
    >>>> into
    >>>>>> an agreement with a fiscal agent or sponsor. Otherwise, there is no
    >>>> "we”
    >>>>> to
    >>>>>> enter into said agreement.
    >>>>>> 
    >>>>>> Cary
    >>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> On Jul 24, 2017, at 1:03 PM, EDWIN VINCENT SPERR <[log in to unmask]
    >>> 
    >>>>> wrote:
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> Again, it is great that things have worked out so well for so
    >> long.
    >>>> And
    >>>>>> there is nothing about the process of formalization that requires
    >> (or
    >>>> is
    >>>>>> even intended to bring about) the sidelining of the folks who have
    >>>> worked
    >>>>>> so hard to make the Conferences, the Journal and everything else
    >>> such a
    >>>>>> success.
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> However, there are over 3300 folks currently subscribed to the
    >> list
    >>>> (it
    >>>>>> is by far the largest list that CLIR hosts), and I'm not sure about
    >>>>>> Conference attendance, but the FCIG report tells us that "Recent
    >>> total
    >>>>>> budgets for the annual Code4Lib conference have exceeded $250,000"
    >> [
    >>>>>> https://wiki.code4lib.org/FCIG_Report#Description_of_
    >>> Current_Practice
    >>>> <
    >>>>>> https://wiki.code4lib.org/FCIG_Report#Description_of_
    >>> Current_Practice
    >>>>> ].
    >>>>>> Frankly, if there has *ever* been a time when we could somehow
    >>>> ascertain
    >>>>>> the consensus of the entire community about "what it wants" in an
    >>>>> informal
    >>>>>> way, I would argue that it passed a while ago.
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> There is no need for governance to imply a top-down
    >> centralization
    >>>>>> (though formally electing Roy Tennant as God-Emperor and being done
    >>>> with
    >>>>> it
    >>>>>> is certainly an option open to us). Instead, it can be structured
    >> in
    >>>> many
    >>>>>> ways as a formalization of existing practice. There is no
    >> absolutely
    >>> no
    >>>>>> reason that our existing Trustees can't be elected as officers. And
    >>>> when
    >>>>>> they want to set their burden down for a bit, the Community can
    >> elect
    >>>> new
    >>>>>> ones. Making this process explicit may be more trouble in some
    >> ways,
    >>>> but
    >>>>>> it's also considerably more democratic.
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> Not least, this is a discussion that will likely be forced upon
    >> us
    >>> if
    >>>>> we
    >>>>>> try to proceed with partnering with a fiscal sponsor for future
    >>>> meetings.
    >>>>>> Instead of just randomly copying some bylaws from somewhere, let's
    >>>> start
    >>>>>> thinking about how to intentionally adopt a form of governance that
    >>>>>> preserves the things that we currently like.
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> Edwin Sperr
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> Clinical Information Librarian
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> AU / UGA Medical Partnership
    >>>>>>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> |
    >> [log in to unmask]
    >>>>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> ________________________________
    >>>>>>> From: Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask] <mailto:
    >>>>>> [log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Eric Hellman <
    >>> [log in to unmask]
    >>>>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
    >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 12:08:31 PM
    >>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
    >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Governance for Code4Lib (was: What's so
    >> bad
    >>>>>> about bylaws?)
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> I've been pondering about this a fair amount.
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> I don't think Code4Lib is an "amorphous entity with no systematic
    >>> way
    >>>>> of
    >>>>>> arriving at a decision or definable point of contact". Rather, it
    >> is
    >>> a
    >>>>>> decentralized community with long-established norms and
    >>> consensus-based
    >>>>>> procedures for discerning the will of the community.
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> The community has been able to accomplish a great deal using
    >>>> volunteers
    >>>>>> and, for the lack of a better word, trustees. The trustees have
    >> been
    >>>>>> largely self-appointed or have responded to community requests.
    >> These
    >>>>>> trustees manage assets and capabilities for the benefit of the
    >>>> community.
    >>>>>> The asset that has put the largest burden on the part of the
    >> trustee
    >>>> has
    >>>>>> been the annual conference and the corresponding fiscal
    >> liabilities.
    >>>>>> Because of the burden of this trusteeship, it has been handed off
    >>> from
    >>>>>> trustee to trustee.
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> I think it would help if we reframed the discussion away from
    >>>>>> "formalizing governance of Code4Lib" to "improving the fiscal
    >>>> continuity
    >>>>> of
    >>>>>> a trustee for one (or more) of the Code4Lib community
    >>>>> assets/liabilities",
    >>>>>> which I think the fiscal continuity group has advanced
    >> considerably.
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> There has been some good work done in developing and documenting
    >>> the
    >>>>>> norms and procedures in our community. For example:
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> https://code4lib.org/about <https://code4lib.org/about>
    >>>>>>> About | code4lib<https://code4lib.org/about <
    >>>>> https://code4lib.org/about
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> code4lib.org <http://code4lib.org/>
    >>>>>>> code4lib isn't entirely about code or libraries. It is a
    >>>>>> volunteer-driven collective of hackers, designers, architects,
    >>>> curators,
    >>>>>> catalogers, artists and instigators ...
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> About | code4lib<https://code4lib.org/about <
    >>>>> https://code4lib.org/about
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> code4lib.org <http://code4lib.org/>
    >>>>>>> code4lib isn't entirely about code or libraries. It is a
    >>>>>> volunteer-driven collective of hackers, designers, architects,
    >>>> curators,
    >>>>>> catalogers, artists and instigators ...
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> https://wiki.code4lib.org/How_to_hack_code4lib <
    >>>>>> https://wiki.code4lib.org/How_to_hack_code4lib> <
    >>>>>> https://wiki.code4lib.org/How_to_hack_code4lib <
    >>>>> https://wiki.code4lib.org/
    >>>>>> How_to_hack_code4lib>>
    >>>>>>> How to hack code4lib - Code4Lib<https://wiki.
    >>>> code4lib.org/How_to_hack_
    >>>>>> code4lib <https://wiki.code4lib.org/How_to_hack_code4lib>>
    >>>>>>> wiki.code4lib.org <http://wiki.code4lib.org/>
    >>>>>>> Hop into the #code4lib IRC channel and listen for a while. The
    >>>>>> conference back channel on IRC is the most invaluable tool
    >> available
    >>> to
    >>>>>> help you quickly get the feel ...
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> How to hack code4lib - Code4Lib<https://wiki.
    >>>> code4lib.org/How_to_hack_
    >>>>>> code4lib <https://wiki.code4lib.org/How_to_hack_code4lib>>
    >>>>>>> wiki.code4lib.org <http://wiki.code4lib.org/>
    >>>>>>> Hop into the #code4lib IRC channel and listen for a while. The
    >>>>>> conference back channel on IRC is the most invaluable tool
    >> available
    >>> to
    >>>>>> help you quickly get the feel ...
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_
    >>>>>> YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.99orczg96qj5 <
    >>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_
    >>>>>> YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.99orczg96qj5> <
    >>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_
    >>>>>> YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.99orczg96qj5 <
    >>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_
    >>>>>> YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.99orczg96qj5>>
    >>>>>>> [https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/QNBNsGIckkoGTAfhTZn3mAJGHTD-
    >>>>>> 1AGkFTMViVGoNiYuMAADkx94tfyT-JrQgOI0y2-ilg=w1200-h630-p <
    >> https://lh6
    >>> .
    >>>>>> googleusercontent.com/QNBNsGIckkoGTAfhTZn3mAJGHTD-
    >>>>>> 1AGkFTMViVGoNiYuMAADkx94tfyT-JrQgOI0y2-ilg=w1200-h630-p>]<h
    >>>>>> ttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_
    >>>>>> YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.99orczg96qj5 <
    >>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_
    >>>>>> YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.99orczg96qj5>>
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> Code4Lib indoctrination<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-
    >>>>>> 9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.
    >>>>>> 99orczg96qj5 <
    >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_
    >>>>>> YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.99orczg96qj5>>
    >>>>>>> docs.google.com <http://docs.google.com/>
    >>>>>>> How do we make code4lib a more inclusive place for newcomers? or,
    >>> how
    >>>>> do
    >>>>>> we quickly indoctrinate newbies to our values and ways of doing
    >>> things?
    >>>>> If
    >>>>>> any, what made you feel like an “outsider” at the Code4Lib
    >> community
    >>>>> (IRC,
    >>>>>> Listserv, etc)? Inside jokes in IRC or listserv suggestions? Maybe
    >> we
    >>>>> s...
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> [https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/QNBNsGIckkoGTAfhTZn3mAJGHTD-
    >>>>>> 1AGkFTMViVGoNiYuMAADkx94tfyT-JrQgOI0y2-ilg=w1200-h630-p <
    >> https://lh6
    >>> .
    >>>>>> googleusercontent.com/QNBNsGIckkoGTAfhTZn3mAJGHTD-
    >>>>>> 1AGkFTMViVGoNiYuMAADkx94tfyT-JrQgOI0y2-ilg=w1200-h630-p>]<h
    >>>>>> ttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_
    >>>>>> YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.99orczg96qj5 <
    >>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_
    >>>>>> YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.99orczg96qj5>>
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> Code4Lib indoctrination<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-
    >>>>>> 9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.
    >>>>>> 99orczg96qj5 <
    >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m-9VtL7L_fUxl2hTF_
    >>>>>> YZSdFRfucaLtmHvLSzom6XPVM/edit?pli=1#heading=h.99orczg96qj5>>
    >>>>>>> docs.google.com <http://docs.google.com/>
    >>>>>>> How do we make code4lib a more inclusive place for newcomers? or,
    >>> how
    >>>>> do
    >>>>>> we quickly indoctrinate newbies to our values and ways of doing
    >>> things?
    >>>>> If
    >>>>>> any, what made you feel like an “outsider” at the Code4Lib
    >> community
    >>>>> (IRC,
    >>>>>> Listserv, etc)? Inside jokes in IRC or listserv suggestions? Maybe
    >> we
    >>>>> s...
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> https://github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/
    >>>>>> master/code_of_conduct.md <https://github.com/code4lib/
    >>>>>> antiharassment-policy/blob/master/code_of_conduct.md><htt
    >>>>>> ps://github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/
    >>>>>> master/code_of_conduct.md <https://github.com/code4lib/
    >>>>>> antiharassment-policy/blob/master/code_of_conduct.md>>
    >>>>>>> [https://avatars2.githubusercontent.com/u/1158447?v=3&s=400 <
    >>>>>> https://avatars2.githubusercontent.com/u/1158447?v=3&s=400
    >>>> ]<https://
    >>>>>> github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/
    >>>> master/code_of_conduct.md
    >>>>> <
    >>>>>> https://github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/
    >>>>>> master/code_of_conduct.md>>
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> antiharassment-policy/code_of_conduct.md at master ...<
    >>>>>> https://github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/
    >>> master/code_of_
    >>>>>> conduct.md <
    >> https://github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/
    >>>>>> master/code_of_conduct.md>>
    >>>>>>> github.com <http://github.com/>
    >>>>>>> antiharassment-policy - Code4lib anti-harassment policy drafting
    >>>> space
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> [https://avatars2.githubusercontent.com/u/1158447?v=3&s=400 <
    >>>>>> https://avatars2.githubusercontent.com/u/1158447?v=3&s=400
    >>>> ]<https://
    >>>>>> github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/
    >>>> master/code_of_conduct.md
    >>>>> <
    >>>>>> https://github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/
    >>>>>> master/code_of_conduct.md>>
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> antiharassment-policy/code_of_conduct.md at master ...<
    >>>>>> https://github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/
    >>> master/code_of_
    >>>>>> conduct.md <
    >> https://github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/blob/
    >>>>>> master/code_of_conduct.md>>
    >>>>>>> github.com <http://github.com/>
    >>>>>>> antiharassment-policy - Code4lib anti-harassment policy drafting
    >>>> space
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> It may be useful to further document Code4lib's consensus-based
    >>>>>> procedures and policies for the benefit of legal entities that need
    >>> to
    >>>>> work
    >>>>>> with us, but a formal governance structure for the community (as
    >>>> opposed
    >>>>> to
    >>>>>> that of an asset trustee) is something that I don't think the
    >>> community
    >>>>>> needs or wants.
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> Also, I think the notion that we're indebted to "dumb luck"
    >> forgets
    >>>>> that
    >>>>>> "luck" is created by a lot of hard work.
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> Eric
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>> On Jul 24, 2017, at 11:01 AM, EDWIN VINCENT SPERR <
    >> [log in to unmask]
    >>>> 
    >>>>>> wrote:
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>> It is true that the Community has held 12 annual conferences
    >>> without
    >>>>>> formalization. And yes, it is likely *possible* to continue with
    >> the
    >>>>>> current model of every conference being essentially a separate
    >>> entity,
    >>>>> and
    >>>>>> support from the larger community being on an ad-hoc basis. But the
    >>>>> reason
    >>>>>> we are having this discussion is that this is not a particularly
    >> good
    >>>>>> option -- it depends not only on good will, but (as Coral has
    >> noted)
    >>>> dumb
    >>>>>> luck as well. It also means more stress and effort on the part of
    >>> each
    >>>>>> year's organizers than necessary.
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>> However, if we *do* form a relationship with another entity (or
    >>>>>> self-incorporate), some person or persons will sign an agreement
    >> that
    >>>>> binds
    >>>>>> us, however you define "us", to a course of action that will likely
    >>>> span
    >>>>>> several conferences. This is indeed a significantly different type
    >> of
    >>>>>> decision than has come before, and it requires a different way of
    >>> doing
    >>>>>> business. Everybody has had a bad experience or two with
    >> bureaucracy,
    >>>> but
    >>>>>> the current approach of trying to maintain Code4Lib as an amorphous
    >>>>> entity
    >>>>>> with no systematic way of arriving at a decision or definable point
    >>> of
    >>>>>> contact has real and tangible drawbacks.
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>> So, in the spirit of the current way of doing things, I propose
    >>> the
    >>>>>> formation of an ad-hoc, self-nominated committee (perhaps the last
    >> of
    >>>> its
    >>>>>> kind) to investigate a formal governance structure for Code4Lib and
    >>>> then
    >>>>>> assist the Community with its implementation.
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>> If you're interested in joining me, please contact me off-list:
    >>>>>> [log in to unmask]
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>>> Date:    Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:35:13 -0400
    >>>>>>>>> From:    Adam Constabaris <[log in to unmask]>
    >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: What's so bad about bylaws?
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>>> It's an interesting question, but code4lib -- whatever exactly
    >>> that
    >>>>> is
    >>>>>> --
    >>>>>>>>> has managed to make all sorts of decisions, about where to hold
    >>>>>>>>> conferences, keynote speakers, etc. for over a decade without
    >>>>>> formalizing.
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>>> I am unclear on the exact details, but there is some carryover
    >> of
    >>>>>>>>> conference funds from year to year and if I had to guess -- and
    >>>> this
    >>>>>> is a
    >>>>>>>>> guess -- it relies on the good will of the previous year's
    >> fiscal
    >>>>>> sponsor(s)
    >>>>>>>>> transferring the funds to the upcoming year's fiscal
    >> sponsor(s).
    >>>>>> However
    >>>>>>>>> exactly that process works, it's happened multiple times at the
    >>>>>> direction
    >>>>>>>>> of the community; each time, though, different parties are
    >>>> involved.
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>>> The F*C*IG is attempting to address (among other things) the
    >>>>>> tenuousness of
    >>>>>>>>> that arrangement, and they've identified a number of proposals
    >>> that
    >>>>>> appear
    >>>>>>>>> to yield enough formal organization to ensure continuity.   The
    >>>>>>>>> decision doesn't strike me as more momentous or different in
    >> kind
    >>>>> from
    >>>>>> the ones code4lib has
    >>>>>>>>> made in the past, and shouldn't require any new mechanisms.
    >>>>>>>> 
    >>>>>>>> Ed Sperr
    >>>>>>>> Clinical Information Librarian
    >>>>>>>> AU/UGA Medical Partnership
    >>>>>>>> Athens, GA
    >>>>>>>> [log in to unmask] | [log in to unmask]
    >>>>>> 
    >>>>> 
    >>>> 
    >>>> 
    >>>> 
    >>>> --
    >>>> Andromeda Yelton
    >>>> Senior Software Engineer, MIT Libraries: https://libraries.mit.edu/
    >>>> President, Library & Information Technology Association:
    >>>> http://www.lita.org
    >>>> http://andromedayelton.com
    >>>> @ThatAndromeda <http://twitter.com/ThatAndromeda>
    >>>> 
    >>> 
    >> 
    > -- 
    > Tim McGeary
    > [log in to unmask]
    > GTalk/Yahoo/Skype/Twitter: timmcgeary
    > 484-294-7660 (Google Voice)