Overleg:Archief/Conceptstatuten e.d./Statutes (Foundation/Association)

Uit Wikimedia
Naar navigatie springen Naar zoeken springen

Delphine gaf aan dat deze pagina beter op Meta kan worden gezet, zodat zij hem makkelijker in de gaten kan houden. Dus bij deze het verzoek om de vertaling op Meta te zetten. - Galwaygirl 26 nov 2005 00:48 (CET)Reageren[reageer]

Ik hoop dta je wel een link heen en weer wilt zetten? :) Effeietsanders 27 nov 2005 12:22 (CET)Reageren[reageer]
Hier lijkt mij de juiste plaats (de vertaling is slechts een vertaling, geen officieel stuk). Als eea compleet is, zal ik wel een redir op meta zetten. Is nu nog wip (work in progress). RonaldB 28 nov 2005 14:36 (CET)Reageren[reageer]


Article 3

Article 3: The board members shall be appointed and suspended by the board.

There is something I don't get here. Is it to be read that the board shall appoint itself over and over again? (ie. the starting members of the board appoint the following members and from then on the board self appoints?), or that the board will appoint members of the board to fill the three positions treasurer etc.?" Delphine 18 jan 2006 09:10 (CET)Reageren[reageer]
The board (as entity) appoints new members, either or not to fill-up a (future) vacancy. This clause is there, because an existing member of te board is the only person who can register a change with the Chamber of Commerce. And only after this registration has been done, the appointment is legally official.
The by-laws define the nomination procedure, etc. - RonaldB 19 jan 2006 18:38 (CET)Reageren[reageer]

Article 3: Any board member can be appointed more than one of the functions aforementioned.

I assume there is a bug in the translation, but I'd like clarification. Is it to be read "Any board member can be appointed to more than one of the functions aforementioned, or "Any board member can't be appointed tomore than one of the functions aforementioned" ? Delphine 18 jan 2006 09:10 (CET)Reageren[reageer]
You're right (translation bug): "appointed to", i.e. one person can be chairman and secretary at the same time (as an example). - RonaldB 19 jan 2006 18:38 (CET)Reageren[reageer]

Article 5

2.An annual board meeting shall be held within six months following any financial year. The agenda shall at least comprise the fixation of the balance sheet and the survey of income/expenses. Other meetings will be held every quarter.

Just as a piece of advice. Although I find it good that the meetings of the board are decided in the statutes, I believe that the quarter meeting is getting a bit too precise. I would leave out that one, or at least give the possibility of meeting online (well, I know the Netherlands is small, but still ;) ).Delphine 18 jan 2006 09:10 (CET)Reageren[reageer]
Indeed, the Netherlands is small (and crowded). We have in general better experiences with irl meetings. Obviously, irc (and other means) are ok for ad-hoc and/or emergency decisions to be taken. The statutes define that these are valid as well.
The Dutch text says "quartely <or something else>". My personal opinion: 5/6 meetings per annum as minimum. Otherwise the organisation is a sleeping thing. Don't think this to be too much, bearing in mind the frequency of meetings we currently have with Kennisnet. - RonaldB 19 jan 2006 18:51 (CET)Reageren[reageer]
To be clear: 9/10 times a year we meet in Zoetermeer at Kennisnet's :P Effeietsanders 19 jan 2006 20:29 (CET)Reageren[reageer]

Article 105

Provided the statutes or by-laws do not define otherwise, all decisions shall be taken by absolute majority vote. In the case of equal votes, the proposal will be regarded as voted down.'

I don't know if it is clear in Dutch, but I believe it would be good to maybe make something more precise, ie. absolute majority of the votes expressed (ie. ruling out abstentions and blank votes and not counting non-present members).Delphine 18 jan 2006 09:10 (CET)Reageren[reageer]
"expressed" was already contained in the Dutch text, have added something to rule out abstentions, etc. Translation adapted as well.
Btw, have had similar discussions with another user on other articles. Just overlooked this one. Thanks - RonaldB 22 jan 2006 17:29 (CET)Reageren[reageer]

Article 10

3.The general assembly may modify or declare void these by-laws.
4.The by-laws shall define the procedure to modify or declaring void the by-laws.

I think it'd be better to define now the way the bylaws can be changed or voided, so as to make sure this is "set in stone" and agreed upon before the Association starts working. Something like a majority of xx% for the void part seems to be important. But then I don't really know the rationale behind this article so... Delphine 18 jan 2006 09:10 (CET) Ooooops. I mixed bylaws and statutes. Forget this comment. Delphine 18 jan 2006 09:13 (CET)Reageren[reageer]

Concluding comments. Apart from the way the board is actually appointed (especially in the case of the association) which is really not clear to me, and the few remarks I made, that are minor, I find those bylaws to be clear and precise. Good work :-) Delphine 18 jan 2006 09:17 (CET)Reageren[reageer]

Hopefully, above remarks are clarifying enough - RonaldB 22 jan 2006 17:31 (CET)Reageren[reageer]