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

Re: PostgreSQL Europe statutes : recap (2ndround)

From: Koen Martens <gmc(at)sonologic(dot)nl>
To: damien clochard <damien(at)dalibo(dot)info>
Cc: pgeu-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Europe statutes : recap (2ndround)
Date: 2008-02-13 19:02:02
Message-ID: 20080213190201.GR8437@dave.dh.sono (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgeu-general
Hi,

On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 01:10:42AM +0100, damien clochard wrote:
> ok here's the 5 remaining issues :
> 
>    
> > 1- Membership fee ?
> >       a : Keep the statutes as they are 
> >       b : No membership fee for people
> >       c : Optional membership fee for people
> 
> Consensus seems to be ; 
> 
> "Don't write any reference to a membership fee in the statutes". 
> People can get into the association simply by filling and sending an 
> membership request . The Board of Directors has to approve the membership 
> resquest for it to be valid.
> 
> Solution : 1b
> 
> >
> > 2- Membership ?
> >      a : Keep the statutes as they are
> >      b : Automatic membership for users of local groups
> >      c : Optional membership for users of local groups
> >
> 
> >From my point of view we can find a agreement with this rule :
> 
> When a local group wants to join the European group, it  provides the 
> list of its members who are ok to be also member of the pg-eu association. 
> These persons become "automatically'" members of PostgreSQL
> 
> The actual allows this, no need to change them.
> 
> solution : 2a
> 
> > 3- Quorum ?
> >     a : Keep the statutes as they are
> >     b : Lower the quorum
> >     c : Drop the quorum
> >
> 
> That one is tough !
> 
> It seems to me that we can find an agreement by lowering the quorum to 25%.
> When the quorum is not reached, we organize a second quorum-free GA within 30 
> days where people can vote by electronic means ( e-mail, IRC ).
> 
> In other word, if the GA is composed of less than 1/4 of the members, 
> decisions must be submitted to the members by electronic voting during the 
> following month.
> 
> solution : 3b
> 
> > 4- Takeover protection ?
> >     a : Keep statutes as they are
> >     b : Add more criterium for the member to satisfy
> >
> 
> Most people seems to say : "Let's keep things simple"
> The statutes already provides features against evil members.
> 
> solution  : 4a 
> 
> > 5- Companies : sponsors or members ?
> >     a : Keep the statutes as they are
> >     b : Companies are sponsors
> >
> 
> Companies are sponsors.
> Only individuals can be members
> 
> 
> solution ; 5b
> 
> 
> I'm conscious that these solutions are not perfect and that some of you might 
> object on some details.
> 
> However if you're ok with these propositions ,can you reply "+1" to this 
> message. If you're not feel free to respond with detailled 
> counter-propositions and if possible the sentences and  paragraphs that you 
> want to add or remove from the statutes.

+1

Bit late, but well, life's busy...

I think i've sufficiently vented my opinions already, and am willing to
accept the concensus reached.

Thanks for doing all this work!

Best,

Koen


-- 
K.F.J. Martens, Sonologic, http://www.sonologic.nl/
Networking, hosting, embedded systems, unix, artificial intelligence.
Public PGP key: http://www.metro.cx/pubkey-gmc.asc
Wondering about the funny attachment your mail program
can't read? Visit http://www.openpgp.org/

In response to

pgeu-general by date

Next:From: damien clochardDate: 2008-02-17 18:16:14
Subject: PostgreSQL Europe statutes : FREEZE
Previous:From: Koen MartensDate: 2008-02-13 08:25:11
Subject: Re: Shirts

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group