| 1 |
I think rich0 is spot-on here where if we make it even shorter, it gets |
| 2 |
even stronger: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Section 4.9. Termination from Membership. |
| 5 |
Membership may be terminated by a majority vote of the board of trustees. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
No explanation required. Right now, it sounds like the trustees may need to |
| 8 |
justify that the member is acting contrary to the purpose(s) of the |
| 9 |
Foundation. When really, no justification should be required (it just opens |
| 10 |
the door for endless argument, grumpiness, and thus more likely to lead to |
| 11 |
legal action). At the very least, it should say that the trustees can |
| 12 |
remove anyone *they feel* (ie. based on *their opinion*, which can't be |
| 13 |
argued) is acting poorly. That removes the possibility of debate. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
-Daniel |
Archives