Re: Draft bylaws are now available

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> Josh,

>> In answer to the two year term question. I find that the most
>> appropriate middle ground. There are long term projects we have and will
>> have in play that need solid points of contact. It will add to stability
>> of the corporation, which is important.
>
> Hmmm. Sounds like the ideal, then, would be to go out of the gate with some
> term (2 years) with some *easy* way to change the terms later. Note that
> "2/3 of the voting membership" isn't easy. Ideas on how we could build this
> in?

I was fairly happy with the content of by-laws. The initial serving
period of two years is reasonable to me. I would expect that much of
the first year would be spent gaining experience and "fine-tuning" the
operations of the corporation. This would also ensure/enforce that
the initial goals of the corporation are addressed by those that have
dedicated considerable effort in initiating these goals.

I don't think that removing a Board member should be easy. If it is
clear that a member is flagrantly abusing his or her position,
achieving a two thirds vote will be attainable.

One point that I like is the overlapping terms. This will enforce the
continuity of focus and vision.

There are also some points that I would like to discuss changing.
Under Article I section 4 Annual meeting. The first sentence, "Annual
Meetings." is a redundant and is a sentence fragment. :)

Under Article IV Section 1
Since the corporation will be handling money via the treasurer, I
think verbiage should be added required a trimester/quarterly audit by
someone other than the treasurer to ensure that accounts balance.

Under Article V Right of Participation:
I have a question. Will participation be limited to US residents,
North American residents, or to anyone anywhere? :o)

--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.

Visit the Los Angles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG)
http://pugs.postgresql.org/lapug