[Wikipedia-l] bylaws III

[Ray Saintonge]

Alex T. wrote:

>From: "Ray Saintonge" <saintonge at telus.net>
>
>>Anthere wrote:
>>
>>>What do we define as approval by the general membership ?
>>>
>>Normally this would refer to a meeting of all members;  including this
>>reference suggests that a vote at other times, such as by a general vote
>>on a Meta page, would not be valid.
>>
><..snip..>
>
>Why can't members vote without a meeting? It says the board may vote
>without a meeting in art. IV, sec. 4 then members can vote without a meeting
>too.  We have already had voting on meta, there is nothing here that says
>we can't continue to do that as long as some kind of balloting process is
>respected.
>
The passage in question was in the definition of Honorary Member: 
"approval by the general membership at the General Meeting of the 
Foundation".  This seems to imply that one would be held, but the idea 
of a general meeting of members is mostly left undefined, and appears 
nowhere else in the by-laws

><..snip..>
>
>>Unfortunately, no provision has been made in the by-laws for such a
>>
>meeting.
><..snip..>
>
>Just because it does not state anything does not mean it cannot occur,
>the Board of Trustees has the authority in Art. XIX, sec. 5 to do anything
>that is not inconsistent with the bylaws.
>
>Maybe you just need to ask the Board of Trustees to pass a resolution
>calling a membership meeting.
>
Yes, they could do that.

>>There is also nothing in
>>the by-laws to define "Board of Directors".  The simple fact that the
>>term was used suggests that it is at least something different from the
>>Board of Trustees.
>>
>
>Maybe it was a typo? There seem to be a few typos in the document.
>Maybe this is why it is not signed. That would seem to indicate that it
>is a draft.
>
Agreed, because several of the problems could be improved by rewording 
without changing the apparent intent.  One clear typo is that "Article 
XIX" should really read "Article IX".  

Ec