- Original Message -
From: John Southern
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 1:22 AM
Subject: Re: [ql-users] Fw: RE:Quanta AGM
On Thursday 31 March 2005 19:20, gwicks wrote:
I think there is something that is a more urgent priority. I was surprised
to discover this year
This message forwarded to ql-users - original message bounced because BT
have changed my default email address for a trial broadband service. JG
- Original Message -
From: John Gilpin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ql-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 10:37 AM
Subject:
John Gilpin wrote:
Special Resolution Number 1.
Cutting out the wording regarding how the various paragraphs will be
renumbered, this resolution boils down to in order to improve the
balance between continuity and refreshment of the Quanta committee
it is suggested that no member shall
John Hall wrote:
John Gilpin wrote:
The rest of the resolution covers any situations to avoid all the
committee members standing down at the same time and to decide who's
turn it is to stand down at any given point in time.
[Clauses 5.3 - 5.4]
But in doing so it creates the situation
On Thursday 31 March 2005 18:28, Tarquin Mills wrote:
I going to put forward a special resolution for next year to abolish
clause 11.0 (Honoraria) which basically means giving officials money out
of Quanta funds. At worst this is corrupt, at best a waste of precious
money that could be better
- Original Message -
From: John Gilpin
To: ql-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 9:08 AM
Subject: [ql-users] Fw: RE:Quanta AGM
Availability of Current copies of the Constitution:
When the Constitution is changed, it is updated on the Library Guide
(LibGuide - disk
- Original Message -
From: Tarquin Mills
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: [ql-users] Fw: RE:Quanta AGM
I going to put forward a special resolution for next year to abolish
clause 11.0 (Honoraria) which basically means giving officials money out
John Southern wrote:
Has this clause every been used?
Speaking for myself, I would happily vote to delete this clause to
remove any ambiguity.
I have heard that it has been used in the past, this does not surprise
me as an honoraria was given to ex-Quanta chairman Syd Humphries at the
I was one of the many that resigned my Quanta membership in protest to
mis-use of honoraria back in the mists of time (about 1990 I think).
John Southern wrote:
On Thursday 31 March 2005 18:28, Tarquin Mills wrote:
I going to put forward a special resolution for next year to abolish
clause
On Thursday 31 March 2005 19:20, gwicks wrote:
I think there is something that is a more urgent priority. I was surprised
to discover this year that committee members do not pay a subscription.
This is not in the constitution and I have no idea when and why it was
approved.
As a matter of
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 at 23:26:45, Jeremy Taffel wrote:
(ref: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
I was one of the many that resigned my Quanta membership in protest to
mis-use of honoraria back in the mists of time (about 1990 I think).
... and don't forget the very large amounts of money (£9000 per annum I
11 matches
Mail list logo
