Sebastian Moleski wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
I don't agree that that's necessarily the case. It's entirely within the realm of possibility for a chapter (board) to appoint a representative who can make decisions/vote on behalf of the chapter.
This should be checked by a lawyer, but imho, that's not correct, at least in France. Of course, this would depend on which types of decisions. If the decisions were completely operational and if the chapter has an ED, and if the decision is within the range of the strategy defined by the board, it's entirely okay that the ED makes the decision.
This may indeed be different from legal system to legal system. German law allows the board to appoint individuals who can represent the chapter individually within a clearly defined subset of the board's authority. I don't know French law but this may be something articles of association/bylaws of your chapter may stipulate too.
However, in most other cases, I do not think that's okay. The responsability of the organisation is in the hands of the entire board. Not one member. Even if the member receives the delegation to *vote* at the meeting, I believe the decision can be cancelled afterwards if the board is not in agreement.
If this were the case, establishing any sort of organization with organizations as members and some sort of decision-making authority would generally be close to impossible. If there is disagreement in certain areas among the board, the representative's mandate should just exlude that topic area. That means, he can participate in some discussions in a binding way, in others only in an advisory/consultative manner.
Correct. Which is fine as long as no decision is made during the general meeting with all chapters... :-(
If we accept some sort of democratic process as the premise of decision making, open membership creates a range of problems fixed membership does not. If, for example, each chapter gets two voting representatives, it's easier to make up the rules that follow regarding quorum and debate. It's much harder if every chapter can bring as many as they want.
Sorry, I meant "open membership" but within the board pool (and probably ED pool :-)). If 5/9 board members are present at the meeting, they constitute a quorum and their decision is *legal*. Of course, the chapter may have one or two votes within the entire group.
Sure. The question is one of fairness: is it fair for some chapters to send five delegates (i.e. voices in discussion) when others can only afford to send one?
LOL.
Is that fair that some participants are fluent with English and others are not ? Is that fair that some participants have a loud voice and others a weak one that can not float over the general noise ? Is that fair that some participants are easy and outgoing, whilst others are rather discreet and shy ? Is that fair that a very well developped chapter has only one voice to elect a member whilst a brand new little chapter also has one ?
There is no fairness in the world Seb, only an approach of fairness :-)
Sebastian
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l