Q1: How many directors do you think the first permanent board should have as a maximum?
I think 5 is good. 7 would work, more than that is unwieldy. (It should be an odd number, ideally.)
Q2: Do you agree that the Board should be elected using the "Approval Voting" system?
Yes. Single Transferable Vote would be a good alternative, but it rather more difficult to organise and I don't think it's worth it.
Q3: Do you agree that candidates who receive 50% or less of the vote will not be elected?
This question is really asking which is better, a smaller than intended board or a board which doesn't have a strong mandate from the membership? One alternative would be to have a second election in the event that less than the maximum number of board members get 50%, with just the top 5 (or whatever the max is) and a simple yea or nay on whether to give each a seat (this gets round the risk of someone who is approved of by the community not getting a seat due to tactical voting).
Q4: Do you agree that as an exception to this rule, the candidate who receives the most votes will always be elected - even if they dont get more than 50%?
Yes, someone has to run the charity. In fact, the minimum number of board members is 3, isn't it? So the top 3 need to be elected regardless (otherwise the top one would have to choose another two board members, giving them far too much power for somebody without a mandate). (The alternative is leaving some of the outgoing board in power, but why should they be preferred if they didn't do better in the election?) My idea of a 2nd election would be this situation less likely.
Q5: Is there any way that you think the election should be run differently to the election of the interim Board?
There is the question of how the vote will actually be conducted. The default is a show of hands in the AGM, but alternatives are a secret ballot at the AGM or (I believe) a secret ballot held after the AGM with people able to vote by email or online, or something. A show of hands is quickest and simplest, my only concern is (as I said in the last election), I'm not entirely comfortable with members of the board knowing that other members of the board voted against them (I would hope it wouldn't cause major problems, but it might cause some awkwardness). If it's going to be a secret ballot, I would vote for it being at the AGM itself, that allows the old board to hand over to the new board there and then and the new board to immeadiately hold their first meeting. All candidates will be known in advance and people can vote by proxy, so there is no real harm in not giving people a chance to vote after the meeting.