Got it.<br><br>I find it odd that Ashley grasped the incompatibility of his position before the rest of the board did, and more to the point, that they only did grasp it <i>after</i> he stepped down. Of those who signed the EGM, what are your views on that?<br>
<br>WH.<br><br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 6 August 2012 01:19, Thomas Dalton <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:thomas.dalton@gmail.com" target="_blank">thomas.dalton@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

<div>On 6 August 2012 01:11, WilliamH &lt;<a href="mailto:william.wiki.admin@gmail.com" target="_blank">william.wiki.admin@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I see that the EGM call has been closed as unsuccessful. Do calls like that have a legal expiry date based on their opening, or was it just considered stale?<br>
<br>
</div>Calls like that don&#39;t have any legal meaning - the law only talks<br>
about the actual request with all the signatures being sent to the<br>
company. How you go about getting those signatures is up to you. I<br>
blanked it because it became clear it wasn&#39;t going to reach 13<br>
signatures.<br>
<div><div><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Wikimedia UK mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org" target="_blank">wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l" target="_blank">http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l</a><br>
WMUK: <a href="http://uk.wikimedia.org" target="_blank">http://uk.wikimedia.org</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>