View Single Post
Posts: 51 | Thanked: 260 times | Joined on Sep 2010
#48
Originally Posted by joerg_rw View Post
You still are mixing legal ownership/responsibility/liability with organizationally agreed upon chain of command that isn't based on any laws and thus can't get enforced.Do you? Please read my post again, I still hope it will eventually become clear, maybe on reading it a third time.
the above listed things - "ownership, responsibility, liability and organizationally" are very closely tied, i believe discussing them separately will only lead to mis-understandings.

Originally Posted by joerg_rw View Post
While legal liability (and thus power) is sorted (from high power/responsibility to low) like:
HiFo BoD
HiFo at large
Council
(community, zilch liability)
yes this is essentially how i see it aswell.

Originally Posted by joerg_rw View Post
the chain of command is - not coincidentally - exactly other way around (sorted from boss to subordinate):
community (has all the power)
Council (serves as community's proxy, steward)
HiFo BoD (owner, thus serving as and usually called 'cashier' to make clear they don't decide on themselves what to do with assets)

The first hierarchy is written down in bylaws and legal laws. The second got agreed upon in community as model how stuff should work and thus the second established the first in result. Seems to me this is the basic concept of any democratic organization anywhere. "Lower" levels delegating power to "higher" levels, nevertheless expecting that those "higher" levels do what the "lower" level (the people, in the end) tell them to do. Every president gets sworn in to act in best interest of his people. The better constitutions even have means to asure he actually does (impeachment? Meh, probably the wrong country ;-D ) Anyway maemo community always been quite good at this, until recently.
And this it were our interpretations differ:
council and HiFo members are voted in for, by voting you are entrusting the person whom you vote for to manage what their respective entities have responsibility( and authority ) over. there is no direct way to tell them what to do except the methods stated in their respective by-laws.

there is nothing in the bylaws of HiFo stating that the council can directly tell it what to do, only that the council can "communicate the needs of the membership to the Board"

of course you can also ask them, but the decision is up to them


Originally Posted by joerg_rw View Post
PS: ""BoD can (not) do whatever they like"" - again depends of your POV. BoD actually legally can do whatever they like - first approach, since they are owner. However they are not supposed to and in bylaws there might be some rules that try to make sure they don't. In very hard cases (like giving away all assets without consulting community, to somebody that is not in line with the purpose of HiFo) they actually can get sued by law, and not only BoD but everybody faintly involved who agreed with any rogue activity and didn't try to stop it (thus my 'veto' which woody mistook as me self-appointing myself to any leader role - I didn't, actually I'm absolutely convinced maemo never had such leader role at all, and shouldn't get any now). I'm afraid this could bite our rear when we transfer assets to MCeV that doesn't adhere to the definition of "community" as written down in HiFo and Council bylaws/rules. Any GA is not the Maemo community, no matter how hard you try. It's at least highly questionable if this was legal according to PA laws that apply to HiFo .
well kinda - they can do what they like in the sense that i can steal my neighbors car, its still illegal though.
if they do not act in the interests of the body whom elected them then there will be either federal(in USA) or case law (previous law suits used as precedent )you can use against them

please keep in mind the meaning of the word "veto" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veto i think "boycott" is closer to what you intended to mean


Originally Posted by joerg_rw View Post
PPS: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/...fdirectors.asp is about a commercial company which, no matter how hard you try by issuing shares or whatever, always is a hierarchical top-down management, aka "dictatorship". Maemo community however is the exact opposite: a true democracy and we don't want this to get turned into a commercial "dictatorship" by MCeV or HiFo - exactly the root cause for Rob eventually leaving.
shareholder/stockholders == parties who hold a vested interest == maemo community ( as defined by bylaws is garage members )

and no, it is not a dictatorship - there are ways for shareholders to replace the board of directors
 

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to chainsawbike For This Useful Post: