 | | Re: A Lego display fund raiser —Tony Hedglen
|
| | | Okay Dave, Now let’s talk about freedom. Clubs in the United States are FREE to do what they wish. If the club is a private club then it should be FREE to endorse what ever it chooses. If the club wants to reject members it has every right to do so. (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: A Lego display fund raiser —James Powell
|
| | | | | (...) That is right. However, I have seen at least 3 people post saying that they are not 100% about MichLUG _as a club_ doing this show. This is not limiting your options, go form Mich_Cath_LUG if you really want to, that would acchive the same (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: A Lego display fund raiser —Tony Hedglen
|
| | | | | | James, the point has been all messed up. My point was that I thought Larry was trying to dictate what the cub can or cannot do. I WAS NOT debating on the use of the Michlug “logo”. I have said many times that I don’t care if the “logo” is there or (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: A Lego display fund raiser —James Powell
|
| | | | | | (...) I'd disagree with that one...the reason why I moved it to .debate was to take it out of being a single club issue. The fact is that _all_ clubs have the same potential problem, and as such, I felt it belonged outside of .michlug, and in (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: A Lego display fund raiser —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) *Now* we're getting somewhere, and you may be surprised to learn that on this point you and I are in complete agreement! A non-guvmint-funded club is absolutely free to accept or reject members as it sees fit; it can refuse membership on basis (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
