Re: [gentoo-nfp] Eligible ex-devs

[Grant Goodyear]

Paul de Vrieze wrote: [Fri Oct 06 2006, 02:12:50AM CDT]
> > a) Both ferringb and ciaranm are eligible to vote: They both
> >    participated in the last (foundation) election (IMHO) and their
> >    status as foundation members never ceased. Membership termination
> >    can only be voluntarily or by 2/3 majority during the annual meeting
> >    or any special meeting as specified by the Bylaws.

I agree.

> > b) Tsunam is not eligible to vote, as he joined gentoo only 0.85 years
> >    ago. (Just a sample as we discussed it on IRC)

I agree.

> > c) Joe Developer was active until 2 weeks ago. He did _not_ vote in the
> >    last (foundation) election. Thus, he never became a foundation member
> >    and can't become one in this election. He's not eligible to vote.

I agree here, too.

> > Besides: The current election, as it is our implementation of
> > the "Annual Meeting" as specified by the Bylaws, will beinvalid, as all
> > Foundation members must have notice[2] "... not less than ten(10) days
> > [...] before the date of the meeting. ...". As we're still collecting
> > all eligible voters we can be sure that not all foundation members have
> > received such notice.

Have I mentioned the flaws in the proposed bylaws?  It's not an accident
that they've never been approved.  Given that, my feeling is that we
should follow the same rules that we used for the last election.

> > In short: We need a secretary to do this properly. We need to keep track
> > who voted when, and we need to send out notice in time. As this is an
> > annual duty only, I'd like to suggest to hire a lawyer who does all
> > this, in the foundation's name, once a year. As all notice can go out
> > electronically, there is not so much financial overhead here.

That seems a bit much for what is a fairly simple procedure.  In
principle one of the trustees is supposed to be the secretary.

> Agreed. But be aware that the bylaws have not been approved by any (not
> even the board of trustees). I think that we should still follow the
> bylaws and consider them accepted by default (no opposition).

Oh, gads, I certainly wouldn't consider them approved.  The unfortunate
quorum requirements would instantly stall any progress we might want to
make after the election.

> It should be clear that only members can vote and that a special rule
> was constituted (and not retracted later) to allow eligible members to
> become member by voting. All developers that have been active for more
> than 1 year are eligible.
>
> As it currently stands no-one has canceled his membership so everyone
> who once became a member (by voting or by being trustee) is eligible to
> vote.

Yep, that's my interpretation, as well.

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear	
Gentoo Developer
g2boojum@g.o
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76