Re: The BAA and new BCS membership requirements

Richard's remarks make it clear I gave insufficient weight in my
'position paper' to the obligation the BAA Committee has to ensure the
balance of funds subscribed over the years are devoted to promoting
the language.

Arguably, to wind up BAA and abandon that money to the BCS would fail
to meet that obligation.

SJT



On Apr 4, 2:15 pm, micro...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> I don't know what talks have been held with the BCS, but if they are
> being unreasonable then it seems to me that the very first thing to do
> is to get a legal opinion on whether the BAA is part of the BCS, or is
> a separate organisation affiliated to the BCS, which is what the BAA
> constitution appears to say.  Clearly, a new APL Association can very
> easily be set up without the BCS, so the only issue is money - who
> owns the (not inconsiderable) funds which have been subscribed by the
> APL community (and by APL vendors) for the promotion of APL and for no
> other purpose.
>
> No one wants to be confrontational about this.  However, in the event
> that the BCS attempts to divert these funds to other purposes, then I
> think that a complaint to the Charity Commission would be
> appropriate.  But the best option would be an amicable agreement
> whereby the BAA splits from the BCS (taking the funds with it!).
>
> Richard Nabavi
> MicroAPL Ltd