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

RE: [atlarge-discuss] Bylaws Discussion

At 09:31 p.m. 31/05/2003, Joanna Lane wrote:

Proposed Bylaws:

Article 1. Name of the Organization

1.1 The name of the organization shall be determined by the Board of Directors in consultation with the membership and once selected, shall be registered as a trademark with the relevant authorities.
Joanna does not want a backup organization to guarantee our survival once the "official" one is captured.

3.3 Suspension of the Bylaws -- No provision of the Bylaws may be suspended by the Board without an affirmative vote of the membership. A motion for suspension brought by the Board to the membership for consideration must include a list of all of the provisions to be suspended, the reason for the suspension and the period of time during which the suspension will be in force. The motion will be considered passed if a majority of the membership that cast a vote, vote in the affirmative.
No way. What is this, an early attack on our political stability?
"Suspensions" are to be treated as Charter changes, which under any reasonable constitution requite a qualified majority, not a simple majority.

4.1 No organizational member shall receive salary or other compensation for services provided. Organizational members may be reimbursed for reasonable expenses.
Meaning that paid support staff that will be denied membership rights. Interesting concept.

More to follow.
More thoughtful, I hope.

Frankly, I find the bulk of Danny's draft constitution not applicable to on-line political (self) organizing and trying to refine it may be a waste of time.

We may be better off starting with the rules that we have an immediate need for, (rules to Poll the membership and elect officers) let the members ratify those and then build the other modules from that members' sanctioned base.
We need to think outside the traditional box of the average charitable organization.
In spite of having sacrificed a great deal for ICANN legitimization effort, I don't feel charitable at all. We are fighting for rights and we are constantly threatened with capture.
We don't know our candidates.
We need a Charter that gives the members solid defence against a hijack by any of their elected officers.

What we really should do is follow a christallization process of our Rules, Bylaws or Charter, meaning that we should start with a minute core of election rules and defining the rules for each office that the members want to create, fully utilizing the empowerment that the use of the internet gives us.
From that tiny core, the rest of the rules is developed by those elected to do that job.
Every member can make contributions.