First, are we happy in principle that the directors
should be able to refuse
or revoke membership rights. I could imagine it being used, say, for a
persistent vandal or someone who is tryign to undermine the chapter.
I think it is essential for directors to have that power, just in
case. Someone that insists on disrupting an general meeting, for
example.
Second, are we happy that the directors should be able
to create a new class
of members. The alternative, I guess, is to put this power in the hands of
the membership.
The other part I'm not happy with is that the rights of a class of
membership can be changed at a general meeting of just that class,
meaning they can choose to give themselves more votes than everyone
else and no-one else gets a say in the matter. I think I may be
misunderstanding the whole thing...
Remember, giving powers to the directors doesn't mean the membership
can't do anything about it - a general meeting can pass an ordinary
resolution creating a rule (under article 28.4) saying the board has
to put everyone in the "general members" class (or whatever you call
it) unless they have the permission of that member. (I assume the
board can't change a rule added by a general meeting, although that
isn't explicit... it's probably in the Companies Act somewhere.)