Re: proposed replacement bylaws

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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
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).


Browse spi-general by date

  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