The following message has been taken, complete with headers, from the LB/2003 managers mailing list. It does not represent private email, and the sole purpose for publishing it is to prove that Kingsly John was very much aware of the fact that LB and the BLUG were not the same. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From listmail@kiNOngSPAMly.nPLSet Sun Sep 07 23:21:27 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: listmail@kiNOngSPAMly.nPLSet X-Apparently-To: linux-bangalore-2003-managers@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 38867 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2003 06:21:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 8 Sep 2003 06:21:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tornado.he.net) (64.62.225.2) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 8 Sep 2003 06:21:27 -0000 Received: from utopia.kiNOngSPAMly.nPLSet ([220.226.7.184]) by tornado.he.net for ; Sun, 7 Sep 2003 23:21:08 -0700 Received: (from kingsly@localhost) by utopia.kiNOngSPAMly.nPLSet (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h886N7T05605 for linux-bangalore-2003-managers@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 8 Sep 2003 11:53:07 +0530 Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 11:53:06 +0530 To: linux-bangalore-2003-managers@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lb/2003-managers] Reply about BLUG and lb/2003 Message-ID: <20030908062306.GB5360@utopia.kiNOngSPAMly.nPLSet> Mail-Followup-To: linux-bangalore-2003-managers@yahoogroups.com References: <1063000986.866.49.camel@samurai.india.hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1063000986.866.49.camel@samurai.india.hp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Organization: Kingsly Dot Net X-OS: Linux utopia.kiNOngSPAMly.nPLSet 2.6.0-test4 i686 From: Kingsly John X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=111193504 +++ Sid Carter [Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 11:33:06AM +0530]: > 1. Managers of LB/200x are not related to the BLUG. 1a. One other thing > that needs to be taken care is that, if they are not related, then why > were they judging the Logo contest ? We can leave that out... no one is really interested in this anymore... almost everyone shouting have never been active participants in the BLUG. Would be good to have someone drive some sense into deepak&co. > 4. The seperation of the BLUG from the LB/200X should be slow and > transparent. It should not be immediately visible to the public. Is this the "jace" effect ? if it's transparent it'll be visible.. and we need to make the change immediately.(there is hardly any time between now and the event.) > 5. Another statement that we are also looking for involvement from LUG's > across the country should be made, which may or may not explicitly > mention the BLUG. > 6. Define rules for the membership > 7. Initiate transfer of BLUG and related documents. The problem seems to have fizzled out... lets not rake it up without any reason. > P.S: Somebody needs to sanitize LJ. SRS is on it :-o Do we have an RBL > kinda thingie for LJ ? ;) Make your journal friends only... and give him the nerdy treatment! :-p Kingsly