[Ambassadors] EMEA: Preliminary Statutes

[Thomas Canniot]

On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:15:39 +0100 (CET)
"Gerold" <gerold at lugd.org> wrote:

> OK,
> 
> sorry I'm at work and have no access to my regular mailsystem and account,
> but I think I have to reply here and try to describe a little ...
> 
> > Le Mon, 21 Jan 2008 02:20:43 +0100,
> > red_alert <red_alert at the-psychiatry.ch> a écrit :
> >
> >> Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
> >> > Thomas Canniot wrote:
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >> I read the stautes and as promised here are my coments about them.
> >> >>
> >> >> In France, so as to avoid maybe misimpretation, we are used to
> >> >> definded terms in a 0 article. For example, we define Fedora, Open
> >> >> Source Software, mail (postal mail or email?), GNU/Linux, meeting,
> >> >> vote, signature (handwriting or not?) so as they can't be any
> >> >> misunderstanding while reading the statutes. The purpose is as
> >> >> well to avoit problems. For example, if you send e-mail to ask
> >> >> people to join a major meeting, with the vote of the board for
> >> >> example, and that it is mentionned in the statutes that a postal
> >> >> mail will be sent to ask people to come to the meeting, the
> >> >> meeting and all its content could be canceled because the statutes
> >> >> were not respected. Just my 2 cents.
> >> >>
> >> >> 4.1 "written request" > if someday you decide to permit people to
> >> >> fill an online formular on the web to subscribe to the
> >> >> association, their application won't be valid. Don't go into
> >> >> details like this, or define that "written" means for you that you
> >> >> assume it is also "written" when you fill up a form on da web.
> >> >> Same for 4.3
> >> >>
> >> >> I see ntohing to add but at the 8.4 article. You should describe
> >> >> the tasks of the members of the board. What does the president,
> >> >> the vice president, the treasurer and the secretary do ? In fact,
> >> >> always the same, if some people became inactive, he could not be
> >> >> dismissed because of his inaction, as the statutes do not tell
> >> >> what he has to do. We had this problem in a lug in the North of
> >> >> France... this was damn crap.
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't like this idea of quorum ...  it could also prevent the
> >> >> association to work fluently in the future. If people don't come
> >> >> to the meeting, nor expresses any word about it, it is their
> >> >> problem, and the association should not suffer from it. 7.4
> >> >>
> >> >> I think that's all :)
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Others, please reply with your comments as I'll be watching this
> >> > thread very closely and adjust the Statutes with some of the
> >> > additions Thomas made unless I hear otherwise.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure If I understand that right, Thomas - would you give the
> >> GMM the quorum even if there's not half the members present? I'd say
> >> that's pretty dangerous.
> >
> > Well I don't think so... I think an association lives thanks to the
> > people who feels concerned by it. If more than half of the members are
> > away, it would be a problem and maybe you couldn't held a meeting
> > before waiting for cleaning up your member base.
> > And don't forget there are proxies, normally you could be able to write
> > down on a paper and say : "i trust this person he can vote for me" or
> > "As i can't come, vote for this people / I agree the decision being
> > made".
> ^^
> The law wants that as the board is part of the member and act in the name
> of the member, that decissions like "member fee" or what is really
> important to decide, is done in the (lets call it) yearly "member-meeting"
> in which the members have to fullfill request from the law e.g. yearly
> commitment to the financial department etc.
> 
> AND if you don't get the percantage you (!!!!!) decide in the statutes are
> in person at this meeting you have to announce a second meeting which is,
> no more depending on the amount of available members, written in stone.
> 
> Let me try to make an example to clear out:
> 
> We'll have 100 Users; we decide (by the statutes) that a voting is done,
> when 20% of the members vote at a meeting.
> So we go ahead, and write a invitation to all members, we meet on January
> 1st.
> So 81 persons of our members are not in front of us (including the board)
> at the 1st so we need to invite for a second meeting ....
> we invite for 1st of february, ...
> unfortunately there are only 10 persons who are coming and voting BUT ...
> because this is the second invitation this vote is law.
> So it's up to us to define the quote of "how many persons" must attend at
> such a meeting (which must be held yearly once) to decide something and
> it's up to everybody to attend the invitation (because the timeframe
> before the meeting is also given by the statutes) at the first time.
> AND the members have every time the possibility to WANT and initiate a
> member meeting if they are unsatisfied with the board for example ...
> 
> Any questions? Any comments?
> Any more explanations? Hopefully in german, because my english is not the
> best *bg*
> 

It was very clear, thanks !


Thomas