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: | 20080114141818.GV31998@base.wars-nicht.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Koen Martens | 2008-01-14 14:24:16 | Re: Release Candidate of the PostgreSQL Europe association statutes |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-01-14 13:49:10 | Re: Release Candidate of the PostgreSQL Europe association statutes |