jgoerzen at complete.org
Wed Feb 26 21:19:35 UTC 2003
Just to be clear, Bdale -- we'll be holding discussions on each item listed
starting in a few days. These discussions will be public on this list (your
input, and that from others is welcome) and will include a discussion about
whether each item is even a problem and what the best solution will be.
So, summary version is: thanks for the comments, but we're not ready for
them just quite yet.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 02:11:52PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> John Goerzen <jgoerzen at complete.org> writes:
> > 13 Annual re-election of board members.
> > 39 A method is needed for transitioning from the current board to a full
> > board whose members are re-elected annually.
> Board members serving for a specified term is probably a good idea. I
> strongly suggest that you not propose all board members be re-elected each
> year, though. A staggered system where board members serve for two years
> with half being re-elected in alternating years, or board members serving
> for three years with a third up for re-election each year would provide a
> balance between continuity and "freshness."
> Serving for a longer term than a year shouldn't be a problem if there is an
> effective method for dealing with a board member who becomes inactive in
> mid-term, which appropriately appears higher on your priority list.
> As for a transition plan, I've seen that handled in the past by including an
> explicit assertion about who will serve what remaining terms before
> re-election in the resolution to accept the bylaws changes.
> > 31 Contributing members who fail to turn in any ballot at all should be
> > subject to membership committee review.
> The description of a contributing member is someone who participates actively
> in the community and has the right to vote... this item implies converting
> that right into an obligation? I'm not sure I see the point of that.
> Spi-bylaws mailing list
> Spi-bylaws at lists.spi-inc.org
More information about the Spi-bylaws