Yes, and I pointed to the problem of general assembly not being compatible with maemo rules from very beginning.None of those reasons beng relevant, since garage is the only valid electorate. Those are the people who donated the funds you hold and now you decide to tell them they are basically obsolete and there's another place to go now? Great! That's where you failed.
Heck, btw I even was the one who came up with the *idea* of an eV originally. Sorry for that. I explained that one of the major problems with e.V is to integrate the electorate aka community. I did multiple times even, for win7mac, hours and hours in exhausting irc queries, even when I told him I'm tired and have no time.

Finally Win7mac *swore* that the eV bylaws are ONEHUNDRED PERCENT COMPATIBLE to maemo rules. I asked again during eV foundation meeting, I think I even gave my "yes" only under provisio of this statement being true.
Now I'm "sabotaging" and "toxic" when I tell you you messed it up.
A siddenote: Nokia never had a saying about council, so why should eV? Particularly when win7mac in his post#1 clearly explains that it makes no sense to simply replace Nokia by MCeV. This is doubleplus-nonconclusive.
The whole thing is so messed up I can't find the right words, first you create a eV and bylaws contrary to what you been told they need to be. Then you explain that it is the only way for maemo to survive, and based on that you turn complete established maemo democratic system top-down. a "why should we" is silly excuse for the naive, and actually you make that statement moot with further explanations in very same post.

good luck with your elitist group of paying members. Take maemo to wherever you want, I give up on defending what maemo community once been and what made it prosper. Don't count on me anymore.
Welcome to the decade of emperor chemist.

/j

irrelevant footnote: how is an inactive garage member ANY problem? You don't say your 2/3 majority is 2/3 of known members, do you? USUALLY elections are counted as "percent" of valid votes.
another irrelevant footnote: why needs eV more than the foundation members, and maybe half a dozen reasonable "spares", to have that dang general assembly? You could have designed your bylaws so the eV is acting exactly like it's supposed to: as a long term executive executing what community decides, via the "age old" proven-to-work maemo democratic system, incl council elections and referenda. That e.V as asset owner has the power to do whatever you like does not mean you're also entitled to do so, nobody gave you a mandate for this.

PS: in a former post I said "I don't see any power grab, only one member sufffering severe misconception about nature of things" OWTTE. I admit I've been wrong, this more and more looks like a veritable coup d'etat and I consider HiFo handing over assets to e.V being illegal under these conditions, and to cover my own rear (yes, even I could get sued for THIS when i'd agree or would simply ignore it) I decalre my veto to this particular plan to "restructure" maemo organization and transfer of assets from HiFo to that particular e.V.