Subject: Re: Me again...trying for a full vote
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 14:20:45 -0500
From: Jim Johnson <jdj@takoma.com>
To: mnash@ziplink.net, Tom <tcbarry@erols.com>,
     Celina & Mark <wmwood@erols.com>, Pat <patrish812@aol.com>,
     Paula Riddle <thepea@erols.com>, Jim Johnson <jdj@sligowebworks.com>,
     TammyandNick <TammyandNick@Verizon.net>,
     "Nicholas.Furnary" <Nicholas.Furnary@Verizon.net>,
     vze2728g <vze2728g@Verizon.net>

Sorry for the delay in responding, it's been one of those weeks....

I'm kind of confused by thinking of this in the light of Mary or Lucas. I
want to view it in more of a de-personalized way, as a set of proposed
policy decisions.

At the last meeting, we decided to buy out Marta's share by March 15th, and
go to nine members, at least for now. If we're going to change this
decision, we really should have another meeting in order to change it, so
we can discuss things and get a good group-mind/conscience behind whatever
we do.

I say, instead of trying to do something at the last minute, or without a
meeting, let's just go ahead and buy Marta out as a group, like we decided
to do, then take up these issues at our next meeting. A lot of thought and
discussion went into writing these bylaws, so we should think and discuss
carefully before changing them.

We can always vote on whether or not to sell a share to Lucas, or a second
share to Mary, at our next meeting or at a future meeting. Buying out Marta
now doesn't prevent us from doing these things later; I don't think we
sacrifice any options by waiting for our next meeting. By that time, there
may also might more to whom people who we want to sell a share. This might
be an opportunity to grow our group.

Keeping principles before personalities, these proposals give us four items
for our next agenda:

- As a group, we now have one member, one vote. Do we want to make any
provisions under which a member might have more (or less) than one vote?

- As a group, we've started out by having the ownership in equal pieces. Do
we want to keep it this way, or do we do we want to allow varations in who
owns how much?

- As a group, we've started out by restricting membership to fellowship
members and domestic partners only; do we now want to include relatives?

- Are there any legal or bylaws obstacles to having a member who is under 18?

That's my $0.02......