Re: [OSCOM] bylaw and organisational changes

how much tax and how often are we talking
___
Chalu Kim
eGenius 
17188580142
Brooklyn, New York

...... Original Message .......
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 12:10:44 -0400 "Gregor J. Rothfuss" <[email protected]> 
wrote:
>Martin Baehr wrote:
>> hi,
>> 
>> moving this to a seperate thread to avoid mixing updiscussions on
>> interpretation of the current state with discussions about how we would
>> like it to be in the future.
>> 
>> On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 09:50:14AM +0200, Andrea Resmini wrote:
>>> Personally, I kind of object at the idea for two simple reasons: first, 
>>> unless we think to radically change the way OSCOM works, both Pres and 
>>> Vice-pres have mostly a representative and organizational role (6.5.1 
>>> 'The President directs the work of the association and shall preside at 
>>> Meetings of Members and the Board', same with the Vice on 6.5.2) which 
>>> does not seem to imply conflicts or the need for balancing; second, 
>>> since most is done via Members Meetings, I think that in this case less 
>>> (people) is more and will probably allow for a leaner organization 
workflow.
>> 
>> i fully agree with that.
>> make the board to be the minimum necessary to comply with the law.
>> this also makes it clearer that the work is to be done by the members,
>> not the board. 
>
>as a backgrounder, the legal structure of OSCOM was chosen at the time 
>to enable it to be a non profit under swiss law. this particular 
>structure is called a "verein" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Verein
>
>it might be best to keep that verein status, but change the bylaws to 
>make it easier to become a member. the burden this creates is to elect a 
>new board annually (with minutes et al) and to have bylaws in place. not 
>too onerous when you compare it with having to deal with taxes..
>
>_______________________________________________
>General mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://oscom.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general