1 |
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 2:15 PM Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> Fixing things to wind up the Foundation and fixing things to run |
4 |
> the Foundation is exactly the same work. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> I don't percieve a vote for Alec, at this time, as a vote to wind up |
7 |
> the Foundaion, that happens later with a vote of members. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Its a vote to fix things, possibly by throwing money at the problems. |
10 |
> |
11 |
|
12 |
Sort of. Keep in mind that if your strategy is to achieve compliance |
13 |
and spin down, then you're going to be willing to spend quite a bit of |
14 |
money to resolve things (an unsustainable amount long-term, but there |
15 |
is no long-term). You're also going to try to avoid doing stuff that |
16 |
makes that more complicated (ongoing operations/etc). You don't need |
17 |
a sustainable process, because there is nothing to sustain. Instead |
18 |
the focus should be on what comes next. If you can get that long-term |
19 |
body to start picking up bills and building up donations before you |
20 |
shut down that might also make sense. You might appoint a lawyer as |
21 |
your treasurer/etc. |
22 |
|
23 |
Then if the community doesn't back the vote you just go bankrupt |
24 |
because you're out of money and have no sustainable model going |
25 |
forward. Either way you dissolve the org I guess, it just changes |
26 |
whether the community vs the IRS gets the Gentoo name. |
27 |
|
28 |
-- |
29 |
Rich |