Hiho,
Michael Meeks wrote (03-12-10 15:41)
I added my comments in [MMEEKS: foo !] type brackets as David has done
himself; directly into the wiki; there were a few things that didn't
belong in there though:Firstly - I'm really hopeful reading this; it seems we're getting
somewhere rather good with these bylaws, and I'm nearly happy
which in itself is a great achievement :-p
I also really liked the Membership section preamble, most helpful;
I guess we also need some spiel about the relative dislike of formal
'Roles' in the project in the Member's Roles.
I don't see the need for that, and find it somehow misplaced in apiece with more then 3000 words explaining roles and responsibilities.
I do not believe we should specify exactly four paid employees - I
suggest we specify the two [ though even those I think are
No problem to let the number four out, rather specify the roles.
implementation details ], and do not mandate that they -must- be paid.
Hmm, if one has to conduct the work that the BoD wants to be done in the way the BoD /ED says it has to be done, I'dd rather have them paid (is employed) then being volunteers.
With regard to Sponors - GNOME had the practise of allowing like minded
non-profits (such as Debian / SPI, the FSF etc.) to join the advisory
board without paying fees - and they have had a very positive effect
over the lifetime of that project. I suggest we add a similar section.
I find this an interesting suggestion, but would rather investigate it the next year or so, seeing how our AB works, who are are core affiliates etc.
Then of course there is the voting, which is still rather complex:
"... the nine candidates having won the highest number of votes are
deemed to have been elected ..."If all nine Directors are elected at once, how should the "renewal by
half each year" work?Quite - I'd really like everyone to be elected at once - it simplifies
the work of the MC, and the structure of the community. I don't know
that we expanded on the role of deputies in the document either
incidentally - but hopefully they are another asset for ensuring
continuity ...
Ah, this interesting long standing subject Having read the various ideas/comments, I support the idea of ...
All seats are voted for each year in combination with no limit to the number of times one serves on the BoD.
(If there is a limit to the number of times, I would vote for a different scheme, length.)
Regards,
Cor