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

[Michael Dewey]

At 23:41 02/12/2011, 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.
>

I am a member because I feel that in a small way I thereby contribute 
to the continued work of the community. I agree GBP 10 is not much of 
a contribution but I do not feel that my inactivity otherwise should 
make me 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

Michael Dewey
med at aghmed.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.aghmed.fsnet.co.uk/home.html