[Noisebridge-discuss] Bylaws committee

[Christie Dudley]

I am wanting to look at the entire set of bylaws.  I'd like to go through
everything and see what we can do to eliminate the "cognitive dissonance"
that Shannon referred to.

For example, were you aware that the bylaws included rules on how to remove
members?  Remember that debate we had raging for so long and how we never
resolved it?  As it turns out, we have always had a *legally binding* method
of doing so.  The problem with the

I feel that if we do a good job of this, we'll only have to deal with it
once and we'll be done with it.  I'm going to try to get as many questions
as I can "hallway answered" by the non-profit tax attorney next door.  I
hope that can help guide us in constructing something that's fairly
inexpensive to review, if we have to pay at all.

Yes, I realize people feel that there's a lot better use for our money.  I
can see the point, but it's my perspective that this is more like insurance.
 It's pretty worthless... right up to the point where there's a problem and
then it's absolutely necessary.

Christie
_______
"The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." -- W. Blake.

The outer bounds is only the beginning.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genriel/sets/72157623376093724/


On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 7:17 AM, jim <jim at well.com> wrote:

>
>
>   I think reviewing the bylaws makes sense, but I'm
> leery of making any changes. The only specific
> objection I heard at last night's meeting was that we
> haven't produced an annual report. This does not seem
> optional, given the interests of government audits of
> our 501(c)3 status. Therefore, instead of changing
> the bylaws, it seems to me we should change our
> behavior so's to comply.
>   My offer to help write the report is sincere;
> seems to me that it's a lonely job likely to be
> undone without at least one other person willing to
> participate, maybe bring pizza or do the typing or
> make rude jokes while getting it done....
>   Jonathan's idea of creating an alternate set of
> bylaws strikes me as useful if it's a simple English
> interpretation that does not contradict the existing
> bylaws.
>   Having a get-together seems like it could be fun,
> though I don't see a need for anyone to be a header-
> upper, though a coordinator role seems great.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 00:26 -0800, Christie Dudley wrote:
> > So at the meeting today, the discussion topic I had submitted got
> > shuffled off to a committee.  Since I am really interested in seeing
> > the bylaws change to better reflect the way we actually operate, I'd
> > like to head up this committee.  I might pop a few questions by my
> > lawyerly neighbor who might have a few bits of advice to get us
> > started.
> >
> >
> > Who else is interested in hacking away at the legalese to bend it to
> > the collective will of Noisebridge?  I'm really flexible as to
> > available time, so we can work the meetings around interested people's
> > schedules.  It should be fun!  (In a rather pedantic sort of way...)
> >
> >
> > Christie
> > _______
> > "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." -- W. Blake.
> >
> > The outer bounds is only the beginning.
> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/genriel/sets/72157623376093724/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20100224/2701555e/attachment-0003.html>