---

> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 21:47:22 +0100
> To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> From: gordon.joly@pobox.com
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] CRB checks
>
> At 11:36 +0100 12/9/08, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> >2008/9/12 Gordon Joly <gordon.joly@pobox.com>:
> > > At 23:32 +0100 10/9/08, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> >>> > Gaurantor Membership i believe would need to be overseen, Normal
> >>>> members however would probably not need to go through the same process
> >>>> as it isn't a legally binding position. I suppose thats
> >>>>something the first
> >>>> board
> >>>> needs to decide upon.
> >>>
> >>>True. I tend to forget about supporting membership, since it's a
> >>>fairly meaningless thing - it just means you're a regular donor and
> >>>get an email every so often. I would hope that most people become
> >>>guarantor members, otherwise they're not really involved (I think
> >>>anyone representing the chapter at official chapter activities ought
> > >>to be a full member of the charity - they're the people best placed to
> >>>be voting at AGMs, etc).
> >>>
> >>
> >> I disagree with this approach. I would suggest that approximately 10%
> >> of Wikimedia UK Chapter are guarantor members.
> >
> >Why?
> >
> >______________
>
>
> One reason is the management of the AGM. With say 400 members and a
> 25% quorum, you have to get a hundred people (or more) in one place
> within a very fixed time frame.
>
> Also governance issues, in that everybody must understand their
> responsibilities and liabilities.
>
> Calls for an EGM could happen from time to time as well.
>
> Gordo
>

I still dont see the reason to restrict the number of gaurantor members?

---

Try Facebook in Windows Live Messenger! Try it Now!