1 |
On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 08:17:44PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: |
2 |
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 7:29 PM William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > |
4 |
> > I read the proposal by prometheanfire a year ago also and do not quite |
5 |
> > see why it was so offensive to some. The way I read it it was |
6 |
> > basically making the council a committee in the foundation. The |
7 |
> > council would have still been elected by the developers, and it wasn't |
8 |
> > set up so the Trustees could remove people etc, so there wasn't really |
9 |
> > a way the trustees could control it any more than they control the |
10 |
> > council as it is. If I missed something, tell me. |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> |
13 |
> As I recall the proposal was to have the Council be subordinate to the |
14 |
> Trustees. That basically means they can do whatever they want. To |
15 |
> the degree that the policy said that they wouldn't remove people from |
16 |
> Council they could amend that with a simple majority vote, just as |
17 |
> they can change the Bylaws/etc. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Keep in mind that in a corporation the directors are basically at the |
20 |
> very top legally. Any policy of the corporation can be changed at |
21 |
> their discretion. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> This doesn't really seem like a separation of powers. This is simply |
24 |
> putting the Trustees in charge of everything. They could of course |
25 |
> choose to not intervene in decisions, but any decision would |
26 |
> effectively be appealable to the Trustees (even if the Trustees vote |
27 |
> to not hear any particular appeal). |
28 |
|
29 |
Keep in mind that this is already basically the case. All the trustees |
30 |
have to do is stop paying for infra and revoke our permission to use the |
31 |
Gentoo logo, name etc. |
32 |
|
33 |
> |
34 |
> If protmetheanfire disagrees that he was proposing to make the Council |
35 |
> subordinate to the Trustees he can of course chime in. |
36 |
> |
37 |
> If the Foundation were in better shape I think a structure like that |
38 |
> could work. You'd simply vote the Council members in to the Trustee |
39 |
> slots, and the Trustees could choose to work as Officers. Then the |
40 |
> new Trustees would disband the Council so that the technical body is |
41 |
> back on top, and also holds the legal authority. However, right now |
42 |
> with the mess the Foundation is in I suspect you'd find it difficult |
43 |
> to find volunteers for the Trustee positions that people would be |
44 |
> comfortable having also run the Council. |
45 |
|
46 |
My impression is that we are just waiting for robbat2 to catch up the |
47 |
accounting/tax issues, so the foundation isn't in as big of a mess as |
48 |
has been spread. Again, correct me if I'm wrong. |
49 |
|
50 |
> > Regarding comrel, given that more than one person who has been removed |
51 |
> > from Gentoo has threatened the foundation with law suits, I can |
52 |
> > understand the trustees wanting to be in that loop. |
53 |
> |
54 |
> Just another good reason to not have a foundation to sue... |
55 |
|
56 |
Would you rather have the council and comrel members be open to being |
57 |
sued individually? |
58 |
|
59 |
I'm no expert, but it seems like the legal entity protects us from this. |
60 |
|
61 |
William |