Re: Resolution 1999-08-02.nl: Bylaws Changes

In message <19990804231542(dot)F31846(at)finlandia(dot)infodrom(dot)north(dot)de>, Martin
Schulze
writes:
>Nils Lohner wrote:
>>
>>
>> I hereby propose the following changes to the current Bylaws of Software in
>> the Public Interest, Inc. These changes were presented to and discussed
>> with the membership of the corporation and the general public, and are ready
>
>> to be voted on.
>>
>> The original bylaws for SPI that these changes apply to are available at the
>
>> following location:
>> http://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/spi-bylaws
>>
>>
>> [Changes: Same as last post except for two wording changes in ARTICLE 5]
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -- CHANGES TO THE BYLAWS -----------------------------------------------
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> ARTICLE ONE - ORGANIZATION
>> ARTICLE TWO - PURPOSE
>> These two articles may not be changed, as they are taken from SPI's
>> Certificate of Incorporation.
>
>I'd like to remind you of my thoughts from 12/27/98:
>
>----
>ARTICLE TWO - PURPOSE
>
>Currently only software is mentioned. This would not be a problem if
>we would start from scratch but since one of our supported projects is
>OpenHardware we must not only mention software but also hardware.
>
>Thus some paragraphes need to be changed:
>
>The first paragraph also doesn't mention the source, I'm astonished it
>only alks about free beer, not freedom.
>
><original>
> * To create, form and establish an organization to formulate and
> provide software systems for use by the general public without
> charge;
></original>
>
><Joey>
> * To create, form and establish an organization to formulate and
> provide software and hardware systems for use by the general
> public without charge and with entire source/specifications
> published.
></Joey>
>
><original>
> * to endeavor to monitor and improve the quality of currently
> existing publicly available software;
> * to support, encourage and promote the creation and development of
> software available to the general public;
></original>
>
><Joey>
> * to endeavor to monitor and improve the quality of currently
> existing available free software and hardware;
> * to support, encourage and promote the creation and development of
> free software and hardware available to the general public;
></Joey>
>
>Do we really need the following purpose? I feel that this is the job
>of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and we should not
>overstress our jobs.
>
> * to provide information and education regarding the proper use of
> the Internet;
> * to organize, hold and conduct meetings, discussions and forums on
> contemporary issues concerning the use of computers and computer
> software;
> * to organize, hold and conduct meetings, discussions and forums on
> contemporary issues concerning the use of computers and computer
> software and hardware;
>
>Do we need the following?
>
> * to foster, promote and increase access to software systems
> available to the general public;
> * to aid, assist, cooperate, co-sponsor and otherwise engage in
> concerted action with private, educational and governmental
> organizations and associations on all issues and matters
> concerning the use of computers and computer software
> and generally
> * to endeavor to promote, foster and advance interest in computers
> and computer software by all available means and methods.
>----
>

Joey-

READ THE LINES ABOVE, STATING THAT THE FIRST TWO PARAGRAPHS MAY NOT BE
MODIFIED BECAUSE THEY ARE TAKEN FROM OUR CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION AND
MAY NOT BE MODIFIED FOR LEGAL REASONS. I HAVE POSTED THIS COMMENT IN
RESPONSE TO YOUR SECTION TWO COMMENTS SEVERAL TIMES ALREADY.

There... HTH :)

As far as the remaining comments are concerned, I'll work through them and
integrate them when I get the chance (in the next few days). They're good
comments. I really would have appreciated it though if you could have made
these either during the public discussion period on spi-general, or when I
posted the changes to the board in preparation for the meeting. I've spent
several weeks working on this, and getting all of these comments (even
though good and useful) now kind of sucks because I have to go through
re-editing, reposting to spi-general, etc. all over again- and remeber why I
put some things the way they are to hopefully not change something important.

....deleted...

Nils.