I know I have been an advocate for simplicity and moving forward, but I have to object to an IRC AGM and voting. I'm not one for upholding tradition for the sake of itself, but I would prefer to stick with the conventional methods of voting used by existing corporations. You either attend the AGM in person or you complete a proxy by phone, web site or postal mail. These votes determine who makes up a board which holds a great deal of power and fiduciary responsibility. I consider the Mountain Equipment Co-op to be a respected and progressive organization. MEC is holding their 39th AGM at Simon Frasier University. While I am not privy to their reasons for choosing this traditional format, I personally feel in person meetings keep people and the process more honest and legitimate.
Feel free to modify it. I was attempting to make all options available - but requiring a vote to actually be implemented (that includes phones, by the way; in this set up you cannot use a conference call without a prior vote approval. At least with IRC members would be required to use a password to identify.)
Please note: the minimum quorum for a members meeting is 10, the lower suggested limit from the Chapters Com guideline. Most likely if MW-CA requires in-person AGMs they will only occur in one city, and MW-CA will never represent any other portion of Canada. (This is already, to some extent, the case, and the justification for the Mediawiki Quebec initiative.)
Amgine
I am advocating that we use what has been successful for other Canadian organizations. I don't know the mechanics of how MEC executes their proxy votes by phone, but I would presume they are mailed out a pin based on a request to vote by proxy. I speak out strongly on this subject because I am an opponent to governing an organization by Internet Relay Text chat. I am not suggesting the AGM be held entirely by phone, mail or Internet. I am suggesting the AGM be held in a location where people physically attend, but proxy voting is made available through Internet, phone and mail. To represent Canadian interests, we do not require a board to have members from across Canada. Governance and volunteer participation are significantly different activities. While the voice of all members should be heard by the board, I don't feel we need to have members of the board from across Canada. I make this statement as a board member for a large non-profit corporation. I am open to the possibility that this could change, but in the original incorporation we should focus on a local area where a group of people are going to get this thing off the ground. This local group should meet in person with the expectation that upon incorporation they will be expected to account for their activities at the AGM, in person. I feel the lack of this in-person approach weakens the credibility of the group. If you can demonstrate examples of other successful organizations where this is taking place, I think it's worth considering a different approach. However, that consideration should be deferred until after this corporation is functioning.
On 1 February 2010 15:57, Amgine amgine.saewyc@gmail.com wrote:
I know I have been an advocate for simplicity and moving forward, but I
have
to object to an IRC AGM and voting. I'm not one for upholding tradition
for
the sake of itself, but I would prefer to stick with the conventional methods of voting used by existing corporations. You either attend the
AGM
in person or you complete a proxy by phone, web site or postal mail.
These
votes determine who makes up a board which holds a great deal of power
and
fiduciary responsibility. I consider the Mountain Equipment Co-op to be
a
respected and progressive organization. MEC is holding their 39th AGM at Simon Frasier University. While I am not privy to their reasons for choosing this traditional format, I personally feel in person meetings
keep
people and the process more honest and legitimate.
Feel free to modify it. I was attempting to make all options available - but requiring a vote to actually be implemented (that includes phones, by the way; in this set up you cannot use a conference call without a prior vote approval. At least with IRC members would be required to use a password to identify.)
Please note: the minimum quorum for a members meeting is 10, the lower suggested limit from the Chapters Com guideline. Most likely if MW-CA requires in-person AGMs they will only occur in one city, and MW-CA will never represent any other portion of Canada. (This is already, to some extent, the case, and the justification for the Mediawiki Quebec initiative.)
Amgine
Wikimedia-ca mailing list Wikimedia-ca@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-ca
wikimedia-ca@lists.wikimedia.org