Subject:
|
Re: LDraw.org Bylaws - new proposed clauses
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Sat, 7 Feb 2004 05:32:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2561 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Anders Isaksson wrote:
> > > Tim Courtney wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [Section 6.02: Eligibility for LEGO Company Employees]¬
> > >
> > > What about MegaBloks, or any other company that may have an interest? Why
> > > pointing the finger on TLC only?
> >
> > I don't think we could list which companies to watch out for, and which not to,
> > and be comprehensive. That's why there's a general removal clause in 6.04 to
> > enable the members to remove a SteerCo member in cases of documented, serious
> > allegations.
> >
> > I'd be interested in hearing your suggested solutions for expanding these
> > proposed clauses to be more general though.
> >
> > > Why not have a more general clause about conflict of interest?
> >
> > Its possible, and I think we should hear it out. Please make some suggestions
> > for changes to the clauses ... I'll think on wording also.
>
> After giving some thought to this - I can't think of alternate wording that
> would really do the issue justice, and not end up unnecessarily lengthy and
> awkward. If we start looking for CoI under every rock, I think that's taking it
> too far.
>
> My proposed clauses address this community's concern towards TLC as the prime
> potential stakeholder in a sufficient manner. They also provide a mechanism to
> remove Steering Committee officers caught acting against the interest of the
> community. I think that's enough -- anything more would be too much.
>
> Just as discussion has died down on this issue, I think its resolved to the
> large majority of the community's satisfaction.
Not sensing any disagreement here - so if no one's spoken up by the end of the
weekend, I'm going to add these clauses to the drafts and call for ratification.
-Tim
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LDraw.org Bylaws - new proposed clauses
|
| (...) After giving some thought to this - I can't think of alternate wording that would really do the issue justice, and not end up unnecessarily lengthy and awkward. If we start looking for CoI under every rock, I think that's taking it too far. My (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
68 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
