[UK-TUG] SEGM impose penalties for not voting!

[John Bradford]

Jay,

I've no idea who you are, or what on earth you're talking about.

What am I supposed to be voting for, and what do you want me to resign 
from?  Whatever it is, if you're a member, I'll happily resign.

Regards,

John Bradford

PS  What is [UK-TUG] and what is SEGM?



On Fri 2 Dec 11 23:41, Jay Hammond wrote:
> Dear members
>
> please vote. If you don't, I think you should resign instead. You owe
> it to UKTUG to help keep the show on the road. And if you don't think
> UKTUG should function, you should vote to wind it up or resign.
>
>
>
> The AGM was inquorate. That left UKTUG in difficulty.  As I
> understand it, we are supposed to have an AGM, and that AGM is
> supposed to do certain business.  This SEGM  is a more democratic way
> of resuming the AGM, but it is not, formally speaking, the AGM.
>
> The constitution states the AGM,  if inquorate, is to be resumed (at
> a new time and place, notice being given) and that the quorum is -
> well whichever members turn up, even if that's only the chair and
> their dog. i.e. possibly just 1 member. They can decide what they
> like with whatever consequences that has.
>
> So being inquorate is really bad news for UKTUG. In fact I would go
> so far as to say it is not in the interest of UKTUG to be inquorate.
>
> That does not sound very radical. But there is a clause in the
> constitution that permits the committee to eject a member for not
> acting in the interest of UKTUG. And I'm arguing that not voting at
> the AGM (even by proxy) is behaviour that  leads to inquoracy and
> difficulties for UKTUG.  I did propose to the committee that all
> nonvoting members be asked to resign.
>
> If you think that's a bad idea, please let me know (and vote anyway!)
>
>
> Jay Hammond
>
> homemade at talktalk.net
>
>