[Foundation-l] Board resolutions (chapters)

[Sebastian Moleski]

On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Florence Devouard <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> If this were the case, establishing any sort of organization with
>> organizations as members and some sort of decision-making authority
>> would generally be close to impossible. If there is disagreement in
>> certain areas among the board, the representative's mandate should
>> just exlude that topic area. That means, he can participate in some
>> discussions in a binding way, in others only in an
>> advisory/consultative manner.
>
> Correct.
> Which is fine as long as no decision is made during the general meeting
> with all chapters... :-(

I don't quite follow. I suggested an exclusion by topic. So some
decisions they will participate and vote, others they will not. It
entirely depends on what authority they get from their board/chapter.

>> Sure. The question is one of fairness: is it fair for some chapters to
>> send five delegates (i.e. voices in discussion) when others can only
>> afford to send one?
>
> LOL.
>
> Is that fair that some participants are fluent with English and others
> are not ?
> Is that fair that some participants have a loud voice and others a weak
> one that can not float over the general noise ?
> Is that fair that some participants are easy and outgoing, whilst others
> are rather discreet and shy ?
> Is that fair that a very well developped chapter has only one voice to
> elect a member whilst a brand new little chapter also has one ?
>
> There is no fairness in the world Seb, only an approach of fairness :-)

No need to belittle my point. I was talking about an approach to
fairness that involves giving each chapter as fair a voice as is
possible. Like above, some compromise needs to be made. Having each
chapter choose two representatives is such a compromise.

Sebastian