Erm, I think we forgot no.6:

6. If someone just doesn't pay fees, when will he/she no longer be a member? Usually bylaws have a clause saying something along the lines "if you didn't pay your dues for more than a year, and two reminders have been sent the board may remove membership from you".

My opinion is that if you haven't paid the membership fees, you aren't considered as a member so we wouldn't have to "remove membership" from you in the first place. This, of course, doesn't mean that such a person is not allowed to attend meetings, etc but what he can not do is vote. I also suggest that members should also be given priority over non-members when it comes to participating in projects. (e.g., it would be unfair to take a non-member to Mombasa for the Wikipedia for Schools project when there was a member who wanted to go.)

Abbas.

> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:26:07 +0300
> From: oslimoke@gmail.com
> To: wikimediake@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Kenya] Bylaws: ChapCom's Comments
>
> Abbas,
> I agree with that.Lets adopt it.
> Any more queries?
>
> On 7/16/11, Abbas Mahmood <abbasjnr@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Here's what Stephen and I suggested:
> > A minimum of one third of the members can call for a Special Resolution
> > Meeting, with notice given to all members at least 7 days in advance.
> > However, a majority of two thirds of the members' votes shall be required to
> > remove a director, or the whole Board.
> > Abbas.
> >> Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:20:55 +0300
> >> From: oslimoke@gmail.com
> >> To: wikimediake@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Kenya] Bylaws: ChapCom's Comments
> >>
> >> Abbas,
> >> >> I suggest we say 10% of the members can call for a "Special Meeting"
> >> >> to express a vote of no confidence in the board.However such a vote
> >> >> should only be considered valid if atleast 30% of the members partake
> >> >> in it and that the voting out of the board/resolution should be
> >> >> supported by 50% +1 of the voting members(i.e the 30% present)....
> >> >
> >> > May I try to interpret what you are saying in actual figures?
> >> > 10% of ~20 members = 2 members.30% of ~20 members = 6 members51% of the
> >> > 6
> >> > members = 4 members
> >> > So therefore in simpler terms, what you are saying is that at least 2
> >> > members can call for a Special Resolution and the vote is only
> >> > considered
> >> > valid if at least 6 members partake in the voting and the voting out of
> >> > the
> >> > board should be supported by at least 4 members?
> >> > If this is what you are implying, I disagree with it. Once again, I
> >> > borrow
> >> > precedence from Wikimedia Deutschland's case (mentioned earlier
> >> > upthread)
> >> > where they require a majority to remove the Board. 6 out of 20 members
> >> > is
> >> > not a majority.
> >>
> >> Your interpretation is correct.And yes that's my thought and the %
> >> were arbitrary.We could revise them upwards.Plus am considering the
> >> fact that definitely not all members will be present nor would partake
> >> in the elections.Maybe we revise the % upwards??
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> --
> >> Limoke Oscar,
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> WikimediaKE mailing list
> >> WikimediaKE@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediake
> >
>
>
> --
> Limoke Oscar,
> mayenge.blogspot.com
> Freelancer,
> GeoInformatics and GIScience Student
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikimediaKE mailing list
> WikimediaKE@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediake