Re: proposed replacement bylaws

Bdale Garbee writes ("proposed replacement bylaws"):
> At our in-person board meeting earlier this year, the board members
> present worked with Mishi Choudhary from SFLC on the details, and for
> some weeks we've had a draft set of bylaws that everyone on the board
> seems to be comfortable with. I present them here for review and
> discussion, after which I hope we can have a vote of the contributing
> membership to adopt these as SPI's bylaws for the future.

Thanks. It is, in general, admirably clear, and I think with a bit of
work it will be a jolly good thing.

My comments in detail:

Art III s4

The mebers' meeting requisition should be 10% of the _Contributing_
members.

Is the part "... shall constitute presence in person at a meeting"
really effective in US law ?

Art III s8

This is very confusing. Is it the intent to abolish quorum
requirement for meetings of the members ?

Art IV s3

This seems to define annually-relected Directors, biannually-reelected
ones, and triannually-reelected ones. The wording has perhaps been
borrowed from a transitional arrangement ? I think this needs to be
fixed.

Art IV s5

There should be a power for Contributing members to remove a Director.

Art IV s8

Why the long list of communications methods here (and in IV.11) but
not in Art III s4 ?

Art XI s1

Amending the bylaws should require the consent of the Contributing
membership, not of the Baord.

Ian.