discuss: wiki pages footer
Subject:
Re: [discuss] wiki pages footer
From:
Rick Moen ####@####.####
Date:
1 Oct 2008 20:32:43 +0100
Message-Id: <20081001193238.GM1041@linuxmafia.com>
Quoting Jean-Daniel Dodin ####@####.####
> but who can speak for the LDP?
Nothing wrong with posing that question, too -- but I'd just like to
point out that "Who can speak for the LDP" is a wholly _different_
question from "Can an unincorporated association own property?",
the question I just now addressed.
The former is an organisational question; the latter is a legal one.
Those two issues are, in fact, not only wholly different but are
actually orthogonal: Addressing one has zero effect on the other.
> I don't feel like having any property on the LDP :-) (and don't want to)
Please note that I _didn't address_ the question of "Should LDP be
listed as the owner of [anything]". I merely debunked the widespread
misconception that unincorporated associations cannot own property.
It's demonstrably untrue. A great deal of time and effort has been
wasted within LUGs on account of that mistaken belief: I can tell you a
story about that concerning the Silicon Valley Linux User Group, but
it's somewhat outside the scope of this discussion.
> I really don't know what is the situation, here. for example, how
> could we take back the tldp.org domain name if ever Guylhem refused to
> give it (very unlikely)?
Sufficiently paranoid groups can resolve that matter through trust
arrangements, with or without incorporation. (Once again, that was not
a recommendation.)
> If I remember this was the reason why we couldn't use "ldp.org" (but
> I'm not sure)
I believe you're thinking of the linuxdoc.org affair. Here's Machtelt
Garrels's article that covers that matter:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7433
