[Foundation-l] Restricting Appointed members (Proposal).

Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton at gmail.com
Mon Mar 17 14:21:33 UTC 2008


>  BE IT RESOLVED; That Article IV, Section 3 (B) be amended through the addition of the following text;

It shouldn't be done by amending section 3 (B), it should be done by
amending section 3 (D), since that's the part that addresses this
issue:

"(D) The majority of the Board shall be elected or appointed from
within the community."

Basically, just removing the "or appointed" part (and adding something
to take care of interim members). I think a majority is plenty, there
is no need for it to be 2/3. Having it as 2/3 reduces the number of
professionals and experts we can have and they play an important role.

There is a slight issue in working out how to make the elections
binding on the board - at the moment they are purely advisory as I
understand it. The format of the elections is also at the boards
discretion which isn't great - it should be written into the bylaws
(which the board can change, of course, but there's not a lot that can
be done about that - the required majority to amend the bylaws could
be increased, I suppose).

I do think it would be good, just in case, to have the board obliged
to have members actually elected by the community, not just appointed
from it.



More information about the foundation-l mailing list