[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Fsfe-uk] fsfe uk at sheffield [was Re: GNU/Linux Desktops...]

From: Alex Hudson
Subject: Re: [Fsfe-uk] fsfe uk at sheffield [was Re: GNU/Linux Desktops...]
Date: 25 Jan 2002 19:49:45 +0000

On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 11:57, MJ Ray wrote:
> > I hope to free up a little regular time towards the end of next month,
> > which coincides with the seminar that Richard Ibbotson is organising in
> > Sheffield. - How many members of this list will be attending?
> Unsure.  I admit I've been busy lately.  I'll look into it and if there's a
> bigger reason to go, I will.

Paperwork sounds to me like a good reason. I will hopefully be in
attendance anyway - the only thing that might get in my way is moving. I
take possession of my new flat on 11th, but don't leave the old one
until a week or so later - I fully intend this not to get in the way
though :)

> I'm going to have one last go at getting permission to use the UKUUG M&A,
> but if not, I'll probably start writing some new ones next week.  Unless
> anyone beats me to it, of course...

It's unlikely I'm going to beat you ;) I'm going to be lucky to have
email access over the next few weeks, let alone time to write legalese

> Here's a question for it: can the "trustees" (the people who are directors
> of the shell company for companies house) sit on the "council" (the people
> elected by the members to run the org)?  Should they sit there as non-voting
> members anyway, as they need to know what's happening?

Toughie. I would prefer the council to be seen as decoupled from the
legal structure, but also in control of it. Trustees ought to be
officers of the society in some way - so that we can bestow
responsibilities, get reports, etc. I suppose the question in a way
hinges on what proportion of the council might be made up of trustees. I
would hope less than 50%, but if not then the voting rights of the
trustees may have to be analysed. 

I don't think making them non-voting members is necessarily a good idea,
but perhaps making them non-voting for certain issues (the legal
structure of the society, and/or constitutional matters?) would make
sense. However, the more there are of them (and hence the bigger need to
scrutinise?) the more unrepresentative any vote.... so I think we should
be careful before doing something like that. 



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]