also sprach Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com> [2014-04-23 19:39 +0200]:
> We could add a safeguard that there's a grace period of two weeks
> after such a decision. If more than 50% of active/honorary members
> object, in writing, within that time, the decision is reversed.
Realistically speaking, we're hardly ever going to meet in person,
but online, because we are not all based in the same city. It might
make sense to make in-person meetings require a quorum and let IRC
meetings always be quorate.
Because otherwise, the people in Munich (where the Verein is based)
could pretty much do whatever they want, knowing that the rest of
the Verein will not be able to just travel to Munich.
> The only other thing I see as of right now is that extraordinary
> votes go through the board or a board-designated proxy. I would
> prefer to have that run through someone external, like the Debian
> secretary, to avoid potential abuse by the board. Also a corner
> case, but slightly more realistic, imo. And I say that as someone
> who intends to run for board (unless there's already a strong
> candidate pool for the board, I guess). Also see
> da569cf00705df82ade627d1bcb793d49f75a8d6 in Git.
I won't be opposed to it, but I really can't work any more on this
and we should no longer delay sending it in to the authorities…
> Text like "einer den Mitgliedern des Vereins vertrauenswuerdigen
> Person" might fit the bill, here.
I do not think it is possible for all members to all trust one and
the same other person.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> Related projects:
: :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck http://vcs-pkg.org
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
"it always takes longer than you expect, even when
you take into account hofstadter's law."
-- douglas hofstadter
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)