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