Andreas Mantke wrote:
it's your view on the statutes and the reasons for the rule about
affiliation. I don't share that.
independent of the reading of the statutes - what Franklin sent is just
the representation statement. That per se does not trigger this conflict
of interest rule.
Amongst a variety of other things, it depends on the actual meeting
composition and the topics voted or discussed, so I propose to have that
discussion when an actual representation takes place.
If there are concerns on the wording of the statement, happy to talk on
the phone with you anytime.
Florian Effenberger, Executive Director (Geschäftsführer)
Tel: +49 30 5557992-50 | Mail: email@example.com
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
To unsubscribe e-mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy