Re: Some comments

["Almer S. Tigelaar" <almer1 dds nl>]

Hello,

Bart Decrem wrote:
> "Almer S. Tigelaar" wrote:
> > Even though I agree with you partially, I do think we need to define
> > these occasions more clearly in the final document. (Put some border
> > as to what is considered to be allowed when it comes to confidentiality
> > and what is not). Everyone's view on what "certain ocassions" are
> > differ.
> 
> I don't think that's practically do-able.  I think the best thing to do is to
> say that those occasions should be kept to an absolute minimum and that the
> board should always try to conduct all business in the open.  Probably the
> minutes from each meeting should stipulate if anything confidential was
> discussed.  Then, if we start noticing that there's ALWAYS confidential
> discussions going on, we can ask the board to explain why there's so much
> hush-hush stuff going around.   And if they don't have a good explanation, we
> can fire them.

Well, this does make sense. There is however one thing :
Say the next board elected does the same and the board after that one
too, etc..
(This may seem to be very unlikely, but I don't think it necessarily is,
and we
should keep into account such situations)
Shouldn't there be *some* way for the foundation members to request
opening up
a confidential note or something in _extreme_ cases? (through a
referendum?)
(Maybe this goes too far though, we don't want to scare away companies
from
 consulting the board either)

Almer S. Tigelaar.