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

[Hugh O'Neal]

Well I'm as guilty of inaction as anyone, so perhaps I should indeed
resign. I'm only an occasional user of Latex now, but did manage to
typeset a book a few years ago. I haven't time enough to engage in AGMs
etc, just wanted to support the group in some way.

Hugh O'Neal
(h.oneal at ntlworld.com)

On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 23:41 +0000, 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