Re: Petition for referendum




Hi Mark,

I fully recognise that this would have resulted in my not being elected last year. I also think that's a complete straw-man argument, for the reason you state.

I agree it's taking far too much energy - part of that is that we're working *around* the board, not with it. I'm not saying it's a panacea, I'm saying it's a start, one of many things we need to do to make the board more effective.

Cheers,
Dave.

Mark McLoughlin a écrit :
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 18:27 -0400, Daniel Veillard wrote:


 The section of our bylaws defining the number of elected directors is
Article VIII section 2 c) , a reduction to 7 would also affects the maximum
number of directors, as no more than 40% of the elected members can have the
same affiliation:
  40% of 7 is 2.8 , this mean that a reduction to 7 would not allow more
than 2 representatives from the same affiliation.


	That's an interesting point. By my reckoning, that would mean that this
years board would consist of[1]:

Owen Taylor
Luis Villa Jody Goldberg
Daniel Veillard
Tim Ney
Murray Cumming
Christian Schaller

	instead of:

Owen Taylor
Luis Villa
Jody Goldberg
Daniel Veillard
Jonathan Blandford
Federico Mena-Quintero
Tim Ney
Miguel de Icaza
Murray Cumming
Christian Schaller
David Neary

	Meaning we'd have the same board, but without Jonathan, Federico,
Miguel and Dave.

	Would that make for a more effective board?

Cheers,
Mark.

[1] - Yes, its not entirely accurate. Some people on the hypothetical
board-of-seven may not have run for election at all if the board size
was smaller.





--
David Neary
bolsh gimp org





[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]