Bylaws questions after discussions with SFLC

I've been talking with the lawyers from SFLC about our proposed
bylaws, and the following questions have come up.

Section III-5-A, the last paragraph seems like it can go, it's largely
duplicative of C.

In section III-6 we say that you can't transfer membership for value.
That seems to imply that you can transfer membership for free, so
perhaps we should drop the "for value" bit entirely.

Section III-10-B seems kind of odd...

Section III-14-D seems to contradict section III-10-B, we talk about
using approval voting, but previously we set out a bunch of
percentages. How do those mesh together?

Section III-16-A has a minimum notice of 3 days, when reviously (in
III-9-B) it was 10 days. Is that intentional? Why?

Is there any particular reason we don't have a vice president? It
seems like it might make sense, just to have someone who can run
meetings if the president isn't available...

Section V-1-F - the members have to establish compensation (if any),
not the board? That seems odd (not that we're likely to ever have to
worry about it...).

If Karl (or anyone else, for that matter) could try to clarify some of
those points, it would be greatly appreciated. I've already dealt
with the comments that were clearly correct (capitalization,
references to the wrong location, etc), this is just the first round
of the remaining comments that seem like they require some thought
from us. More will probably be on the way after SFLC gets back to
me...

-garrett

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: svn-org-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: svn-org-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jun 21 18:48:23 2006