[Osmf-talk] OSMF Members Request for a General Meeting

Simon Poole simon at poole.ch
Wed Nov 12 12:02:08 UTC 2014


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512



On 11 November 2014 20:45:30 GMT-03:00, Johan & Marguerite <textline at gmail.com> wrote:
>2014-11-11 22:06 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch>:

>To be clear about this: am I correct that Henk and Oliver would be the
>ones
>affected?

l haven't checked recently but it would effect Henk, Dermot, Oliver, Mikel and Steve if I recall correctly.
>
>Furthermore:
>1. I like the idea Mikel had about clearly stating a single term limit
>of
>two years.
>2. I would like to see the 2014 financials on the agenda of the next GM

IMHO if the 3rd resolution is accepted the board should use the opportunity and use the GM as the yearly meeting, breaking the linkage with SOTM. Naturally 2014 financial would be presented at such a meeting. As I've already pointed out from a regulatory pov the report needs to be distributed to the members before the end of May in any case, so this would work out nicely.

>3. I guess the words 'can be' in the resolution on term limit reset
>should either be set to 'is', either a decision mechanism should be
>introduced to decide on 'can be'.
>4. I don't understand why the board needs 7 people. Given the amount of
>work on the board it should be possible to get the board down to 4 or 5
>people. Which will more suit the amount of work, the effectiveness and
>lower the cost of a face-to-face meeting

A larger board makes it , more difficult to gain complete control. Why do you think Steve was suggesting reducing it to 3? Further a board which is no longer a mashup of operational and strategic roles could and should have a number of different view points and opinions.

>
>I would not mind giving the current board several weeks to come up with
>a
>proposal on a change of the AoA regarding the term limit, the number of
>directors and a proposal for a GM early 2015 including the 2014
>financials.

This is not necessary given that the process to require a meeting has completed and the board has essentialy no leeway except from a timing point of view.

Simon

- --
Written with a pen on a Galaxy Note 10. I
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: APG v1.1.1

iQE6BAEBCgAkBQJUY0w/HRxTaW1vbiBQb29sZSA8c2ltb25AcG9vbGUuY2g+AAoJ
EEchcRCS4oLq3O4IAIWdsKfZkKlZE3n0E1FTLY2FTU2QFPXrm1CiUK3cm8pcgkvP
aW4INzGh1PQHdbXV2dKx3ZBaMfD7++FWAAXsjefxCB4zzIqtzgIYc5Q0u4NCMBPx
Gf5Gjv2IqQ+qh5auJxm/22NGEXONynfSbNlVPBZyeG55FwP5+BIAlPErkXICWiki
I36s3xozyPp/GIduPd61T0+2TPxn9eFAiCuE1tO8+M188ffD0BTGdi3YFEDWPTX/
X020IBpbZHDQ4MlpajF5EcNAequDF5hSkW1Bu56LKjkABG5bgGoKOjeQdnm85pe3
ZaMXEKWBaI7y4LfHKgXblqGgglssrAszsAQ2nFc=
=1BKe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





More information about the osmf-talk mailing list