On Tuesday 10 May 2005 10:17 am, Neil Schneider wrote: > > 2004-05-05. That was five days and a year ago. > > OK. I'm glad you found the date. Should we allow them to call an > election at SDMUG, in June? Or, should we insist that the meeting be > called in another venue?
For that matter, there is the technicality that the SDCS no longer has "General Meetings" of its own. And there's the issue of "who's really a member". I hate to say it, but perhaps SDCS should issue "membership cards" of some sort. How much do generic ID cards cost, anyway? Any number of us have digital cameras for picture ID generation, too... I think this whole situation is bringing to light the fact that the Bylaws may not be as comprehensive as they should be, and that perhaps we need to address these issues in a refresh of the Bylaws. > No, it has to be held where there is a quorom. No quorom, no vote. If > it's held at SDPCUG and there isn't a quorom, we can't have a vote. So, we need a meeting where there are at a minimum 30 dues-paid SDCS members, assuming SDMUG recuses itself from voting? Or are we still bound by SDMUG's membership number (guestimate 200 for now), in which case we'd need 70 (200 * 20% = 40) dues-paid SDCS members present? If SDMUG membership is required to be counted towards the quorum numbers, SDCS could rightly be screwed, as I get the general impression that SDMUG members don't really care about SDCS anymore, and voting without caring is dangerous to the organization as a whole. Unless we can scare up 70 non-SDMUG SDCS dues-paid members. Gregory -- Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP Key ID: EAF4844B keyserver: pgpkeys.mit.edu
pgpxnwaFkKbGm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-steer
