<div class="gmail_quote">On 19 July 2011 09:08, James Livingston <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:doctau@mac.com" target="_blank">doctau@mac.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>On 19/07/2011, at 5:15 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:<br>
> Such actions usually require a certain percentage of members to agree. Currently, if something goes really really wrong, I could conceivably look at the members list, call 30 of them on the phone, convince them to share my concern, and voila, I'd have 10% of members on my side. (Needless to say I would need a good reason that convinces them but it is conceivable.) - If we had 3000 members instead of 300, that would become near impossible; the board would become ever more unassailable.<br>
<br>
</div>Rather than a percentage, a few associations I've been part of have used an absolute "N members". That however has problems when the organisation grows, as increasingly small minorities can force EGMs. There have been cases in Australia where large companies had to hold EGMs at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars because 0.01% of the shareholders wanted to pull a political stunt.<br>
<br>
Maybe something like the "square-root" rule could be used, which means you'd need 18 people with 300 members (6%) and 55 with 3000 (1.8%), so it does increase but not linearly. </blockquote></div><div><br></div>
<br clear="all">
<div>Here is another reason to want a reasonably high threshold for an EGM is geography. Our members are dispersed around the world, and assuming we have AGMs in the real rather than the virtual world that involves a substantial travel cost for members who want to attend. Even with proxy voting, you would incur a large expense.</div>
<div><br></div><div>If a minority of say 55 out of 3,000 members could force an EGM then a national chapter could force an EGM. It might be held in their country and they would easily weild a majority vote.</div><div><br>
</div><div>There are a few ways organisations deal with this:</div><div><br></div><div>- a higher threshold for an EGM, or</div><div><br></div><div>- additional requirements for an EGM vote relating to national chapters, e.g. that no single chapter's members can account for more than 50% of the vote</div>
<div><br></div><div>- moving to a delegate voting system, where each national chapter gets a single vote to be used on the basis of agreements in the chapter that were themselves arrived at democratically, or</div><div><br>
</div><div>I would favour keeping a simple percentage rule like 5% or 10% for now, but insert into the articles that once the OSMF grows to a particular size (say 5,000 members) this should be reviewed. In the meantime, a working group could discuss those options in more detail.</div>
<div><br></div><div>This was the solution chosen by the English & Welsh Green Party. It meant we could get on with business while size wasn't a problem, and begin preparations in a more calm fashion for the time when size is a problem (which we've now reached).</div>
<div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Tom Chance</div><div><br></div><div><br>-- <br><a href="http://tom.acrewoods.net" target="_blank">http://tom.acrewoods.net</a> <a href="http://twitter.com/tom_chance" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/tom_chance</a><br>
</div>