At 21:48 +0100 27/6/07, michael west wrote:
On 27/06/07, David Gerard
<<mailto:dgerard@gmail.com>dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
On 27/06/07, Sean Whitton
<<mailto:sean@silentflame.com>sean@silentflame.com> wrote:
I guess it's sad to see that you have been
forced into a 'fake' AGM
purely to meet requirements, but that's the way things are I suppose.
It'd be nicer if the real GM was the AGM, but having a tick-the-box
AGM and an EGM for the launch isn't really a problem.
Now to keep working on the charitable status problem ... *zzzzzz*
- d.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
<mailto:wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org>wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK
<http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l>
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
Charitable status is a difficult thing to work through. If its made
so difficult for say a church, synagogue or mosque, its much more
difficult for an organisation that appears to only have a cyber
presence.
iCommons Ltd seemed to manage it OK within weeks of incorporation. Mr
Jimmy Donal Wales is a Trustee of Icommons Ltd, a charity registered
in England and Wales with working name "Creative Commons" (charity
number 1111577).
Chapter v supporter group? Is that not making even more
complications in tying up the loose ends of charitable status. Does
it also allow chapterists to make changes to the constitution (like
often happens in synagogues and mosques?) Whats to stop wiki-haters
filling up the chapter with their supports to force constitutional
changes etc. As a limited company, the board it protected from
outside attack.
Mike
IANAL, but if there are members, they will hold the liability.
Otherwise, the liability rests with the Trustees (of the charity).
Gordo
--
"Think Feynman"/////////
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
gordon.joly(a)pobox.com///