<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
I look forward to discussing this tonight at Noah's. Thanks for hosting, Noah. And thanks for your thoughts, well described.<br><br>Mitch.<br><br><br>---------------------<br>> Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 13:33:04 -0700<br>> From: albill@arcanology.com<br>> To: noahbalmer@gmail.com<br>> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] meet tomorrow?<br>> CC: noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net<br>> <br>> Noah Balmer wrote:<br>> > My gedanken experiment went something like this. I'm sure that after <br>> > Julia's class I might have other ideas for actions the board might <br>> > take if things go bad, but here's what I've got for now:<br>> ><br>> > *Scenario: a board member (or a minority of the board) is not doing <br>> > their job*<br>> > *No members:* The rest of the board figures out what's going on with <br>> > them and takes appropriate action, including removal by a majority of <br>> > board members then in office (note, not a majority of a quorum) if <br>> > necessary.<br>> > *With members:* same thing happens, but the members are talking about <br>> > whether or not they should get involved, and fighting out the drama, <br>> > instead of talking about how to build a better solar powered whiskey <br>> > fountain.<br>> > *Assessment:* Making a whiskey fountain is more fun than arguing about <br>> > what happens to the board. Board is fine either way.<br>> ><br>> > *Scenario: the whole board goes gradually lazy or evil, together<br>> > No members:* Board members have a legal responsibility to do their <br>> > job, so there's a strong motivation for individual board members not <br>> > to let this happen. It is of course possible, however. We can <br>> > encourage directors to get their act together or resign but can't <br>> > force them. This fucking sucks, we'd better avoid it.<br>> > *With Members:* The members vote the board out, and vote a new board <br>> > in. The new board is starting from scratch, but the organization is <br>> > already in full swing, with active contracts and other legal <br>> > responsibilities which have, until this moment bun run by a presumed <br>> > incompetent board. Inexperienced board, suddenly legally responsible <br>> > for an unfamiliar inherited mess equals total organizational <br>> > disaster. Kicked out board is pissed, so are any supporters they had, <br>> > past donors wonder what the deal is and what they spent their money <br>> > on, PR nightmare. This fucking sucks, we'd better avoid it.<br>> > *Assessment:* The detail-oriented may have noticed that both outcomes <br>> > fucking suck and are better avoided. As Julia put it "If you get to <br>> > the point that you need to kick out the whole board, you've already <br>> > failed." So lets make sure we always have new, not yet corrupted <br>> > people represented as well as experienced, <br>> > possibly-corrupted-but-at-least-know-what's-going-on people. Julia's <br>> > suggestion was to start with a five person board, with a commitment to <br>> > add board members at regular intervals over the first year or two so <br>> > that people's terms end in a staggered fashion. The bylaws can allow <br>> > a varying number of positions on the board (she'd suggested 5-15, and <br>> > 50%+1 as a quorum, though we'd probably want to start on the lower end <br>> > of this range). Term limits ensure that new people show up on the <br>> > board at regular intervals. The idea is to structure the organization <br>> > in such a way that it stays healthy, rather than structure it in such <br>> > a way that it can make desperate attempts to save itself when it's <br>> > unhealthy. <br>> ><br>> <br>> So, people are advocating for people to, possibly, pay a couple of <br>> hundred dollars a month in order for us to get a space in San Francisco <br>> but these same people putting in money won't get any say in how the <br>> group is run, legally? Not everyone who pays a bunch of money is going <br>> to be on the board (or want to be) and we also shouldn't limit board <br>> membership to those who have enough money to pitch in a lot.<br>> <br>> What is the solution?<br>> <br>> Al<br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>> Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net<br>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss<br></body>
</html>