Re: [RFC] On the roles of Maemo Council and Maemo e.V.
 

Rules are about how we are suppose to act.
Enforced by threats of punishment, and promises of reward.
Makes everyday interactions predictable and acceptable.

Roles define proper behavior for certain positions we hold.
Roles are regulated by rules.

How many was broken so far ?

Re: [RFC] On the roles of Maemo Council and Maemo e.V.
 

thanks for this, it shows exactly the whole mess in all this. I have read the bylaws, that's why I didn't believe that the MCeV bylaws were compatible with council's, and I clearly stated that - nevertheless I have been belied at that they WERE COMPATIBLE and any possible problems COULD GET FIXED BY ADJUSTING MCeV BYLAWS LATER ON. I didn't contribute to the bylaws since I'm not obliged to and had no spare time to do so, and I clearly stated that but nevertheless always pointed at this problem.
Now you lie to me and others again, stating that council had already accepted the MCeV bylaws and thus change in own voting or whatever, everybody who wants to know the truth is welcome to e.g. read the protocol of that inaugural meeting of MCeV.

Foundation of a german e.V. been originally my suggestion since I was (and still am) convinced that german laws allow more liberties in formulating statutes that american laws did for the HiFo. Nevertheless I always pointed at the importance to take special care to incorporate the Maemo Council same way it actually was possible to integrate it into HiFo bylaws and proceedings.
Now the story you tell is we need that german e.V. since the HiFo can't accomplish what's needed, and yet obviously the way you set up the e.V is resulting in an inferior entity than HiFo regarding compatibility with maemo community. And when you're getting called out on it, you resort to ad hominem and bitching and lies.

I'm done with this, do whatever you want. Just stop spreading lies about my behavior and/or my statements and votes!

BR
jOERG

Re: [RFC] On the roles of Maemo Council and Maemo e.V.
 

This aint leading nowhere, quite the opposite.
Time for MCeV to get moving - if HiFo allows, that is....

Re: [RFC] On the roles of Maemo Council and Maemo e.V.
 

To end this is your exact wording from the founding meeting http://mg.pov.lt/maemo-meeting-irclo...03-18.log.html

This discussion is about said referendum. It had no impact on council and we said we could not have that - by doing that MCeV would separate councils into two again - and that is what we neither need nor like to happen.

Minutes of the meeting http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=92922 being signed without further note of that being said but it was and still is recognized. We heard you the first time 2nd rd 4th 5th ...Nth time also - so you call me out for lying about something we actually have public record for, public record as in IRC logs, published minutes and signed documents filed at court. Next time you try to pick on me take a topic there is no log of, like last time - don't even dare to reply to that with something else than a sane suggestion for a referendum phrasing!

Can we, please, move fwd in phrasing the referendum to get council out of limbo (again).

Re: [RFC] On the roles of Maemo Council and Maemo e.V.
 

Thank You !

10 chars

Re: [RFC] On the roles of Maemo Council and Maemo e.V.
 

thanks for finally confirming - when not in intended meaning so nevertheless in actual quotes and statements. The rest... :-x

Re: [RFC] On the roles of Maemo Council and Maemo e.V.
 

Referendum suggestion:
Please vote Yes if you agree with the following changes to the Maemo Community Council election rules:

change § 4.1 Council Elections Subsection 6 from to and § 4.1 Council Elections Subsection 12 to As there is a typo (a missing sentence @12) in the original bylaws I just rewrote the whole thing. - bring on your suggestions please. To reduce actual confusion and misunderstanding we might just leave out the original text or we'd need to quote both - we should probably move or link the old election rules page to the bylaws for future reference.

Re: [RFC] On the roles of Maemo Council and Maemo e.V.
 

1) proposed change to § 4.1 Council Elections Subsection 6 : when nominating self for council must declare interest ...
- such as working for Nokia
+ such as working for a company involved in Maemo-related software development (option 1, your)
+ such as working for a company involved in Maemo-related software or hardware development (option 2, mine)

no problem with this change, i don't see why it needs a referendum, most people would simply agree

2) proposed change to § 4.1 Council Elections Subsection 12 : Changes to any of the above rules must be approved by...
- a referendum by everyone registered on garage (= all passive members)
+ general assembly meeting or passive members meeting (your option)

agreed with your option i think, because these rules are legally binding and any changes should be by people with an identity

this is a little worth a referendum because it's a politically significant change of peoples' rights

what? i found this, it is a document for council, it's not legally binding for eV - i do not see a reason to change this item

3) the rest of this discussion is odd, as mentioned before i wouldn't require all council members to join mcev while leaving its roles as is (including being elected by all registered eligible garage users) as if what it asks is illegal then the board can refuse to fullfill its requests anyway

so i am glad you posted your referendum version, it sets aside a lot of noise

Re: [RFC] On the roles of Maemo Council and Maemo e.V.
 

I am missing the part about an undoubtful votum that there'll be only one unified Council after all which resides within MC e.V. and not in outlaw land. I believe this needs clarification since some people here claim that Council is just an aggregation of interests which shall never be servant to any kind of assiciation, but it's leader. 7 months and 30 pages later, this is considered "noise" (unless I misunderstood that part). Not exactly fast, but it shows there's hope...
Still, I'd prefer to be on the safe side and have some kind of avowal for MC e.V. in the referendum.

In MC e.V., the Bylaws (which are supperior to General Regulations) grant sovereignity over General Regulations to GA and Council election rules (§ 4.1) are part of that. This fact seems to be part of the critique for those claiming "compatibilty" issues. In order to make a referendum the *only* option to amand them, Council election rules would need to be seperated from General Regulations (just like there are Board Regulations). I have no objections to this, the only thing is, this can't be subject to a referendum, it requires a descission by GA, so persuade them and this may be resolved too. Why shouldn't community determine it's election procedure for its' representavive on it's own? You have my voice for that. ;)

Re: [RFC] On the roles of Maemo Council and Maemo e.V.
 

how about: such as working for a company commercially interested in Maemo

Because it is written rule (Council Election Rules) to have a referendum (I do not like that word) to change said rules.

Everyone registered on garage (= all passive members) equals (as in is the very same as) Passive Members' Meeting (legal term)

That was discussed and not desired as no-one should be forced to join the MCeV to become council.

That does not change that GA can alter any of the regulations, be it Association Rules be it Board Regulations be it that we have to wear bow-ties for meetings.

I honestly do not get where the deal is with people "demanding" council be the very same as with Nokia and be THE untouchable whatever they think it is. Truth is, the community, us, we, been represented by this council but now the community, we, us, owns Maemo - so the reason to have a council is to leave the option to participate by representation instead of joining the association directly, so people can stay anonymous, trigger discussion with council which draws attention to their needs. Future talk: Council would then pick the right people from MCeV to move on the issue. As far as I am concerned anonymous should not be able to alter any rules not even council election rules, if they want them changed they can ask council about it and move up the ladder...

I'd maybe just give up on getting this sorted any time soon...