MJ Ray wrote:
Is it more practical to wind up AFFS and then restart with a new
organisation that has similar aims but a much more simple constitution
and rules or try to reboot AFFS and drastically change the constitution
which has proven to have effectively crippled it and caused it to drift
into the state that it is now in?
I think it's most practical to start successor organisation(s) and
*then* dissolve AFFS in their favour. However, I don't think that it
was the constitution that crippled AFFS. The constitution was
surprisingly buggy and cumbersome for one from a respected national
body, but I feel a more cooperative group could have made it work.
I think this is the right move as well; I agree with your other comments
too - I was a bit surprised by the problems that we had; and I think it
was a bit telling that the model we used actually disappeared quite
quickly from the site of said national body (as I recall, anyway).
I do think something based on a known model is the way to go again -
people have previously mooted ideas about a charity, and there are
structures available now that were unavailable when AFFS was setup
(CICs) that deserve some thought. In terms of taking over from AFFS,
though, I think the only absolute necessity is a similar enough set of
objects and a similar enough asset lock - neither of which should cause
problems.
All that is needed :) then is a set of people who will put together a
new org.
Cheers,
Alex.
_______________________________________________
Fsfe-uk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk
