Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Release Candidate of the PostgreSQL Europe association statutes

From: Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum <ads(at)pgug(dot)de>
To: damien clochard <damien(at)dalibo(dot)info>
Cc: pgeu-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Release Candidate of the PostgreSQL Europe association statutes
Date: 2008-01-14 14:18:18
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgeu-general
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 02:44:15PM +0100, damien clochard wrote:
> On Monday 14 January 2008 13:32:31 Koen Martens wrote:
> >
> > Ah, yes, a retry within 30 days. Is this practical? I mean, it being a
> > european organisation, it is safe to assume people who will attend the GA
> > will have to make plans in advance. Meaning that if you schedule another
> > one within 30 days, it is likely a lot of the attendees will not be able to
> > come (budget, no holiday left, etc..). I think it is nearly impossible to
> > have 30% present, so that would mean two GA's within 30 days almost by
> > default. It should probably be considered if this is indeed what we would
> > want..
> Actually the quorum is 30% of members present **or represented**. Someone that 
> can't travel to the meeting may give his voice to a member that will be 
> physically present. The statutes also allows voting by e-mail.

In addition we can have meetings on IRC. So it seems reasonable that we
invite for a meeting which virtually everyone could attend who just has
the time. No traveling, no additional costs, most ppl can even continue
your normal work.

In the case we don't reach a quorum by mail/irc/whatever, we have 
another meeting between 6-30 days which goes without quorum.

In an associations you really want quorum decisions, this makes sense.
If not, you don't need an association at all, you can go which 2, 3 
people making decisions, you don't need elections, ah, you don't need a 
group at all.
The "no quorom" is only a fallback to make sure that the group is 
capable of acting even if the majority of the members does not respond.

> > Now, a simple solution would be to drop the quorum. This is not uncommon.
> > An objection to dropping the quorum could be democratic validity, but as
> > said I think in practice you will always end up with a non-quorumed GA
> > within 30 days anyway, so democractic calidity is not an argument.

If the majority does not respond you end up with a second meeting, yes.
But that's not a reason to drop the quorum. Anyway, for important topics 
and some time for preparation/schedule people usually attend meetings.

> There's another quorum of 50% when the General Assembly has to discuss  about 
> dissolving the association. Do you want to drop that quorum too ?

If we drop the first one, why not all?

> > Sorry to be nitpicking, but that's what writing statutes is about :) Assume
> > the worst, and try to make rules that prevent that.

You don't prevent anything if you drop all the rules.

Kind regards

				Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum
German PostgreSQL User Group

In response to

pgeu-general by date

Next:From: Koen MartensDate: 2008-01-14 14:24:16
Subject: Re: Release Candidate of the PostgreSQL Europeassociation statutes
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2008-01-14 13:49:10
Subject: Re: Release Candidate of the PostgreSQL Europe association statutes

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group