Re: [OSCOM] Re: Michi resigns from OSCOM [Fwd: [Board] OSCOM ordinary meeting of members minutes]

On 24.02.2006, at 11:10, Paul Everitt wrote:

> ...
> Nobody on the board claimed that we should be board members in the  
> future.  It's clear who is "actually doing things": you and Sandro  
> are, and the rest of us aren't.  That's not fair to you nor Sandro.
>
> Regarding the question of dissolution, though, it is a point that  
> needed to be addressed:
>
> 1) We had an annual member meeting, and one non-board member showed  
> up.
>
> 2) We felt that board elections were unlikely to produce the  
> minimum candidates per the bylaws.
>
> OSCOM-the-idea is still good.  OSCOM-the-legal-entity, though,  
> deserves discussion.  Little member activity and little board  
> activity means little organization activity.  This is a valid issue  
> to discuss and act on.
>
> I think there are 3 choices for the way forward, based on the bylaws:
>
> 1) Conduct a board election.  If there are 7 or more candidates,  
> and we get enough votes to confirm the board, then all is well and  
> normal.
>
> 2) Make a proposal to the membership to reduce the board size to  
> two people.  Have a membership vote and amend the bylaws.
>
> 3) Pull the plug on the server in a month and have the current  
> board dissolve itself and the legal entity.
>
> At the end of the meeting, it was proposed to extend the current  
> board long enough to sort out (1) and (2).
>
> FWIW, here's my position.  I have always thought OSCOM was a neat  
> idea.  I put a lot of time into it the first couple of years.   
> Lately, though, I put time into other things.  I'd love to see  
> OSCOM have active leadership, and if there is, I will accept tasks  
> given to me.  However, I can't be the one to generate activity,  
> interest, and enthusiasm.  As such, I shouldn't be on the board.
>
> Michael, I know we have let you down by our inactivity.  You're a  
> great person and you and Eric hatched something that is a noble  
> idea.  If you and Sandro feel up to the task, I'll do what I can to  
> help in the next 6 months on (1) or (2).
>
> --Paul


Thats a pretty good summary even - I take it as an answer to my  
question ;-)

Regards
- Boris