A properly drafted legal document is both clear and succinct. It is my hope to
provide you such documents. In order to do so, I must know, as precisely as
possible, the groups goals/desires.
The decision to add a new partner should be by unanimous agreement of existing
partners: to avoid the partnership being 'hijacked' , to assure metaCards
support (i.e. so that MC does not get ripped off) and also to
assure a certain level of commitment and to reflect invested effort. Other
structures are possible, but I do not recommend them.
Unanimous decision by partners would be required to change the partnership.
All other decisions would be by a weighted vote of partners and associates.
It would be wise to reserve a veto in the partners. That is, a unanimous
decision by the partners to veto a decision would have the effect of forcing a
revote on the issue. This prevents 'lowest common denominator' decisions, and
other stupidities.
I would not recommend permitting a veto on less than 75% vote of partners,
i.e. the veto could be less than by unanimity if you agree. A similar veto
could be reserved to associates in the event of a decision to change the
partnership agreement.
A provision can also be added that if the number of partners exceeds 20 that a
sufficient percentage (for example, 75%) would suffice in the place of
unanimity - this prevents 'freezing' the organisation if it grows to large.
What do you think?
____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
