unsolicited at swiz.ca
Sat Dec 26 22:11:06 EST 2009
Lori Paniak wrote, On 12/26/2009 9:54 PM:
> I agree. We are all (equal!) supporters of KWLUG. The last thing
> we need is a special class of KWLUG member.
Is this what the end result of contributions towards meeting space
rental fees is going to be?
A special class of KWLUG member? 
Is the same (problematic?) recognition going to occur when we put
those contributor's logos on the front page of kwlug.org?
 Of course not. But are feathers going to be ruffled?
> On Sat, 2009-12-26 at 17:16 -0800, Raul Suarez wrote:
>> I know people are being facetious, but seriously:
>> Why do we need a name to define whoever wants to put money
>> towards a facility if we ever came to that.
>> A simple posting on the mailing list saying, "a new year is
>> approaching, whoever wants to contribute please email me (to keep
>> it private) Based on the # of responses and offers we'll see if
>> we have enough"
>> Period. No need for names. Specially getting bugged on names.
>> --- On Sat, 12/26/09, john at netdirect.ca <john at netdirect.ca>
>>> From: john at netdirect.ca <john at netdirect.ca> Subject: Re:
>>> [kwlug-disc] communitech? To: "KWLUG discussion"
>>> <kwlug-disc at kwlug.org> Received: Saturday, December 26, 2009,
>>> 5:24 PM -----kwlug-disc-bounces at kwlug.org wrote: -----
>>>> To: KWLUG discussion <kwlug-disc at kwlug.org> Yes, I realize
>>>> that "Sugar Parents" does not win any politically-correctness
>>>> awards either.
>>> Rich uncle? Oh wait: "wealthy relative" ;)
>>> How about "patron" or "matron". Do we need to be gender
>>> "Supporter". Put financial in front of any of these to differ
>>> financial help from other kinds.
More information about the kwlug-disc_kwlug.org