2009/3/17 Michael Bimmler <mbimm...@gmail.com>:
> Sorry, but somehow I fail to understand this.

You're not alone...

> - amendments which are agreed by the WMF (-> no special resolution needed)
> - amendments not agreed by the WMF (-> special resolution needed).
>
> and I think the latter category just cannot exist...

You're right, it can't. There is this little thing called "the law" to
take into account...

> Andrew: If you say "outright repudiation", do you mean "termination of the
> contract" or "violation of the contract in force"?
>
> For the former: Well, both the motion by Thomas and the amendment by Tom
> agree that for termination, a Special Resolution is needed.

Yes, I'm sure we can all agree that termination should require a
special resolution - it's equivalent to dissolving the charity,
really.

> For the latter: Are we indeed saying that we want to pass a clause requiring
> the board not to violate the contract? Is this not a bit....paranoid?

Just a little!

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Reply via email to