[PLUG] PLUG vs. PLUG

[Brian Beattie]

On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 22:45, Cliff Wells wrote:
> Dan Haskell wrote:
> 
> >On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Dan Haskell wrote:
> >
> >  
> >
> >>On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Cliff Wells wrote:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>I have a better solution: PDXLUG can be known as "Portland's Only 
> >>>Non-Profit Linux User Group" and that should clear things up.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>That would be a very acceptable solution to us. Go for it!
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Robby? Matt? How about it?
> >
> >I am not joking here. We could live with that.
> >  
> >
> Frankly I'm a little surprised here.   Taken aback, even.   Who is 
> "we"?   How do you speak for "we"?   How can you say that this is 
> acceptable so quickly, without hearing from anyone else concerned?   I 
> would like one question answered:  is PLUG not for profit (or not)?
> I know that at least one prominent member uses it as a tool to promote 
> his business, but is this the standard, accepted situation?   If so, 
> then I would certainly agree that this would be a good solution.   If 
> most members of PLUG believe it to be non-profit, the someone is going 
> to end up with egg on their face should this change take place.

No you are the one with egg on his face, give up, go away.

-- 
Brian Beattie            | Experienced kernel hacker/embedded systems
beattie at beattie-home.net | programmer, direct or contract, short or
www.beattie-home.net     | long term, available immediately.

"Honor isn't about making the right choices.
It's about dealing with the consequences." -- Midori Koto