Re: [Fsfe-uk] Re: AFFS

[John¹]

On Wednesday 04 March 2009 12:34:06 Alex Hudson wrote:
> We can decrypt the member's database, which I suspect is as complete a
> list as we will have: the only members missing from that are some of
> those who did not renew early on (although most who did not renew are
> still in that list).
>
> It would be easy enough to send out a mail to those who had been
> involved in AFFS at any point based on that information, sans those
> original ex-members who I doubt we have records for now.
>
The only people who need to be notified are those who remain paid up 
members, there would seem to be one other beside myself and the member who 
has already made himself known. And any expenditure on mailing those who 
are no longer members would be an improper use of the remaining funds of 
the AFFS. Obviously you are free to post whatever you wish to whoever you 
wish at your own expense. 

The membership list you refer to is the property of the AFFS, (and 
therefore its members), and should not be used by a person who no longer 
holds membership, you may, you have yet to answer my question as to 
whether you are or not. 

Perhaps you should consult the Information Commissioner's Office before 
going any further. At the moment all records, and minutes, should be 
handed to the existing members, you were asked to provide information. 
After a majority of the remaining paid up members have determined the 
future of the AFFS I have no doubt that they will be pleased to pass on 
its assets. 

Before any one else wants to accuse me of being confrontational, I would 
suggest that they read the entire record since, last Friday I asked at 
least two of the former committee members for information, one of them 
refused any information, "will be ignored if coming from John Seago", "you 
can ask these questions until the heat death of the universe", The other 
offered to make the 1200 mile round trip to "talk" to me rather than give 
written information. Now it appears that these two, in the one case one 
self admitted non-member, and in the other someone unwilling to answer the 
simple question is he or is he not a member? Seem to have all sorts of 
information, records and archives that they seem only prepared to divulge 
to non-members! Perhaps those who wish to form a new Association should 
ask themselves why this is?


-- 
John Seago
GNU/Linux Registered User No. #219566 http://counter.li.org/