From: | Ian Jackson <ijackson(at)chiark(dot)greenend(dot)org(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: proposed replacement bylaws |
Date: | 2016-07-06 10:23:50 |
Message-ID: | 22396.56374.362579.970850@chiark.greenend.org.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
Thread: | |
Lists: | spi-general |
Joshua D. Drake writes ("Re: proposed replacement bylaws"):
> Agreed. Also, I am not sure I like that 10% but I am not sure of a
> better solution. If the contributing membership is 100, 10% is too easy.
> If it is 1000, then it is probably reasonable, if it is 10,000 then we
> have a real problem.
Debian uses a square root for this. I copied that from the rules of
the (now sadly gone) Cambridge University Computer Society...
> > This is very confusing. Is it the intent to abolish quorum
> > requirement for meetings of the members ?
>
> No, it is to state that quorum is who bothers to show up (IIRC). Note
> this is for *members* not Directors.
I don't see a difference between "abolish quorum requirement" and
defining "who bothers to show up" as a quorum, so whatever. The
wording could perhaps be clearer.
> > Art IV s5
> >
> > There should be a power for Contributing members to remove a Director.
>
> There is per their ability to call a meeting in section Art 3 s4.
There is no power for the resolution of such a meeting to exercise the
powers of the Directors (and probably there shouldn't be).
Thanks,
Ian.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ian Jackson | 2016-07-06 12:37:23 | Re: proposed replacement bylaws |
Previous Message | Dimitri John Ledkov | 2016-07-05 22:58:30 | Re: proposed replacement bylaws |