[H-GEN] Support to change Humbug's constitution.

Benjamin Robert Carlyle benc at foxboro.com.au
Tue Nov 28 20:49:17 EST 2000


[ Humbug *General* list - semi-serious discussions about Humbug and  ]
[ Unix-related topics.  Please observe the list's charter.           ]
[ Worthwhile understanding: http://www.humbug.org.au/netiquette.html ]

Willie Yeo wrote:
> 
> [ Humbug *General* list - semi-serious discussions about Humbug and  ]
> [ Unix-related topics.  Please observe the list's charter.           ]
> [ Worthwhile understanding: http://www.humbug.org.au/netiquette.html ]
> 
>          Still you are not tackling the issue of meeting an acceptable
> quorum at an SGM.
> 
>          Quorum = deemed to be the consitutional attendence representative
> of the organisation at a meeting for it to pass motions that is binding.
> 
>          So what if we have Active Financial Members but at an SGM there is
> not enough numbers to meet quorum ?
> 
>          Humbug is non political, and taking away their vote serves no
> purpose. Why do we want to have a clause that I feel is so "political" in
> nature ?

Willie,

The Quorum concept exists to safeguard the membership against
decisions made by the executive that are not supported by the
club.  I a quorum concept is to exist, then the number must be
related to the number of people who could be affected
adversely by such decisions.

Clearly Humbug is not an intensely political organisation,
however the Quorum concept is a political device.  What you
are trying to do is remove the power of the Quorum.

I've suggested a scheme by which a Quoum concept can be
maintained without crippling the SGM process, however the
question that needs to be asked is this:
"If humbug is a non-political special interest club, is the
political device of a Quorum meaningful?"

I would assert that your proposal indicates a negative.  Your
proposal says that the Quorum isn't serving a useful purpose. 
I tend to agree.  If you want a quorum I strongly recommend
something similar to what I have proposed.  If you don't want
or need the political proection a Quorum provides, scrap it
properly:

General Meetings
11. No quorum is required for any Special General Meeting. 
The executive must inform all Financial Members by an
appropriate means of an intention to hold an SGM at least x
weeks prior to the intended date.

This kind of wording gives you what I think you really want,
and what I suspect is most appropriate for the club at this
time in it's existance.  No quorums are needed, and it is
completely up to the membership to decide whether to come or
not.  I think that this is far more appropriate than some
potentially illegal misrepresented quorum concept.  If you
want such a concept, quorum is not the word as it does not
provide any political safeguard.


Benjamin

--
* This is list (humbug) general handled by majordomo at lists.humbug.org.au .
* Postings to this list are only accepted from subscribed addresses of
* lists 'general' or 'general-post'.



More information about the General mailing list