[Noisebridge-discuss] Membership and Elections?

[Rachel McConnell]

Sai Emrys wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Rachel McConnell<rachel at xtreme.com> wrote:
>> Christie, as we're a consensus based organization the voting will merely
>> be a formality.  Once we have decided on the replacement then we'll
>> formalize it with a vote.
> 
> FWIW: I know of no legal requirement regarding how membership or
> director elections are held per se, only as to various ancillary
> aspects (e.g. notification, quorum, ability to participate, recording
> of results, etc). The rest is simply whatever your bylaws dictate.
> 
> You could have those bylaws explicitly state the rules of your
> consensus based decisionmaking process, and it'd be just as legit as a
> vote.

Sai, we were advised against doing that by our lawyer with the rationale
that we were weird enough already and not to push it.

If someone wants to lead the drive to change the bylaws to reflect
consensus, at this point we could probably get away with it, but it will
incur costs of time and lawyer review fees (unless we're all idiotic
enough to dispense with those and be our own consensus lawyer).

Rachel