I have no problem with the additional statement. I actually prefer it to most of the charter and would put it first. I have no strong problem with the first statement of the charter, as currently updated on the site: "The purpose of this group is to promote, nurture & expand Lisp in Seattle. In addition, we contribute to benefit the Lisp community at large." I do find that I am turned off completely by the definition of "promotion." I am not interested in "selling" anything to anybody, especially businesses, who have enough trouble with everybody trying to sell them something. I think of promotion in the sense it is used in the charter of non-profit organizations that promote science and education in some discipline. So I just ignore all of the traffic and discussion about selling Lisp. I am not interested in that business. I will follow this list because of the crossover connection with SeaFunc, but I don't subscribe to this approach to advocacy of a good thing. If the only discussion is about promotion in the sense defined in the charter, I will eventually unsubscribe for lack of interest. - Dennis Dennis E. Hamilton ------------------ The Miser Project / Numbering Peano / Orcmid's Lair mailto:Dennis.Hamilton@acm.org | gsm:+1-206.779.9430 http://miser-theory.info/astraendo/pn http://orcmid.com/blog -----Original Message----- From: seattle-bounces@common-lisp.net [mailto:seattle-bounces@common-lisp.net] On Behalf Of Daniel J Pezely Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 11:02 To: seattle@common-lisp.net Subject: [LispSea] charter Perhaps we should add to the charter, "Contribute to benefit the Lisp community at large," as a secondary mission. Would those of you on this list who have been quiet mind to comment? Do you agree with the proposed minimal charter? (i.e., is the above additional clause redundant due to it being implied by the very existence of this a group?) What are your expectations and desires for a group? [ ... ]