En/na Albert Cervera i Areny ha escrit:
A Dimecres, 29 de juny de 2011 13:12:19, Cédric Krier va escriure:
> On 29/06/11 13:06 +0200, Albert Cervera i Areny wrote:
> > A Dimecres, 29 de juny de 2011 12:36:49, Jordi Esteve va escriure:
> > > As I said before, we have a similar opinion, one puts more
emphasis in
> > > companies and the other in individuals that represents these
> > > companies. We think is better that some people make the decisions of
> > > the foundation (members) and others, companies or people, fund the
> > > foundation (sponsors) to avoid mix the decisions with money.
> >
> > IMHO both things are not incompatible. I think probably most of us
will
> > agree that sponsors and members should be separated. So a company
may be
> > member but not sponsor and another one may be sponsor but not member.
> > The thing is that if companies were allowed to be members, should they
> > have the same vote than individuals? I think it should be this way.
>
> For me, you can be member and sponsor. I don't see any issue in this.
I don't see a problem either, but IMHO they should not be related. (No
more "votes" because you pay more).
Exactly, in the case that companies could be members, then, for example:
1 company = 1 vote
1 person (individual member) = 1 vote
regardless if the companies/people are sponsors of the foundation (put
more or less money).
And 1 company = 1 vote regardless the number of employees (or tryton
skilled employees) of the company (but these tryton employees could be
members as individuals, for example).
All the above sentences are only suggestions how could be Tryton
foundation to avoid a single and power company/individual take the
control of it.
Jordi
--
Jordi Esteve
Consultor Zikzakmedia SL
[email protected]
Mòbil 679 170 693
Zikzakmedia SL
Dr. Fleming, 28, baixos
08720 Vilafranca del Penedès
Tel 93 890 2108
--
[email protected] mailing list
