: Re: [RESULT] Replace the bylaws of Software in the Public
Interest
Date : Mon, 15 Apr 2019 22:56:32 -0400
De :Philippe Cloutier
Pour : spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org
Copie à : Hilmar Lapp , henrik.i...@avoinelama.fi
Hi Hilmar,
On 19-04-15 12 h 32, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
It seems the
bylaws of Software in the Public
Interest
Date : Sat, 13 Apr 2019 13:47:04 -0400
De :Filipus Klutiero
Pour : Tim Potter , spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org
Thank you Tim, hi everyone,
On 19-04-09 15 h 13, Tim Potter wrote:
Hi everyone. The results fo the recent vote to replace the SPI
Hi MJ,
Le 19-04-26 à 13 h 44, MJ Ray a écrit :
Bdale Garbee wrote:
That's not a bad idea, but honestly, given the outcome of the recent
vote, I too believe that just calling for the same vote again with the
call for votes making it VERY clear that there are significant quorum
issues with the
Hi MJ, Bdale, and everyone else who's commented,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 06:44:56PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Bdale Garbee wrote:
>
> > That's not a bad idea, but honestly, given the outcome of the recent
> > vote, I too believe that just calling for the same vote again with the
> > call for votes
Bdale Garbee wrote:
> That's not a bad idea, but honestly, given the outcome of the recent
> vote, I too believe that just calling for the same vote again with the
> call for votes making it VERY clear that there are significant quorum
> issues with the existing bylaws that make it very important
Hi!
Am 2019-04-18 06:51, schrieb Martin Michlmayr:
Is there a process I can follow as an inactive member to get my
account
revoked? Don't won't to block anything for you ...
You can email members...@spi-inc.org
Thanks for the hint. Done.
Best regards,
Alexander
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 07:14:57AM -0400, David Graham wrote:
> We may be missing the forest for the trees in this whole discussion...
>
> Resolution 2009-11-04.jmd.1 was specifically designed to avoid the
> problem of quorum in anticipation of a by-laws referendum based on the
> renewal process s
We may be missing the forest for the trees in this whole discussion...
Resolution 2009-11-04.jmd.1 was specifically designed to avoid the problem of
quorum in anticipation of a by-laws referendum based on the renewal process
started in January of 2003.
The contributing membership expiry resolut
* Alexander Reichle-Schmehl [2019-04-16 09:34]:
> Is there a process I can follow as an inactive member to get my account
> revoked? Don't won't to block anything for you ...
You can email members...@spi-inc.org
--
Martin Michlmayr
https://www.cyrius.com/
___
Hilmar Lapp writes:
> Perhaps it would be better to divide the proposed changes into two
> steps. The first would be to _only_ alter the section on bylaws
> amendments to establish a more reasonable (i.e., realistically
> attainable) quorum.
That's not a bad idea, but honestly, given the outcome
Hi!
Am 2019-04-15 19:05, schrieb Milan Kupcevic:
A two thirds quorum of the full membership is highly unlikely to ever
be
reached, so there’s the potential here that SPI will be forever locked
into the current version of the bylaws. (I suppose the only way out
would be to dissolve and re-incor
Hi Hilmar,
On 19-04-15 12 h 32, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
It seems the current language of the section on amending the bylaws in essence
require at least (= in the best case, i.e., 100% approving votes) a two thirds
quorum for any (substantive, i..e., beyond listing of current officers) changes
to t
On 4/15/19 12:32 PM, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
[...]
>
> A two thirds quorum of the full membership is highly unlikely to ever be
> reached, so there’s the potential here that SPI will be forever locked
> into the current version of the bylaws. (I suppose the only way out
> would be to dissolve and re-
It seems the current language of the section on amending the bylaws in essence
require at least (= in the best case, i.e., 100% approving votes) a two thirds
quorum for any (substantive, i..e., beyond listing of current officers) changes
to the bylaws to pass. Even if that’s not what it states,
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 8:48 PM Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> I wondered if I had been negligent, reading the voting communication too
> fast, but after looking at my mailbox (which might be missing 1 mail), I
> didn't find any indication that abstention effectively opposed the change.
> Judging fr
Thank you Tim, hi everyone,
On 19-04-09 15 h 13, Tim Potter wrote:
Hi everyone. The results fo the recent vote to replace the SPI bylaws
have been calculated.
Out of 216 contributing members 129 votes were cast. 125 votes to
accept the new bylaws to and 4 voted to not accept the new bylaws.
Ar
16 matches
Mail list logo
