<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Andrew Flegg <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andrew@bleb.org" target="_blank">andrew@bleb.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 22:17, Andrew Flegg <<a href="mailto:andrew@bleb.org" target="_blank">andrew@bleb.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 16:11, Sunny B <<a href="mailto:sunnyb7532@gmail.com" target="_blank">sunnyb7532@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Andrew Flegg <<a href="mailto:andrew@bleb.org" target="_blank">andrew@bleb.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> Is this a binary selection:<br>
>>><br>
>>> "Should the Community Council form a governance structure which<br>
>>> sees the continued survival of <a href="http://maemo.org" target="_blank">maemo.org</a> without Nokia involvement?<br>
>>><br>
>>> [ ] Yes<br>
>>> [ ] No"<br>
>>><br>
>> Yes, like this but "Should the Community Council be authorized so that it<br>
>> can form..."<br>
><br>
> Better.<br>
<br>
</div>I don't see the options as limited "form a legal entity like a<br>
not-for-profit" (lots of work) or "let <a href="http://maemo.org" target="_blank">maemo.org</a> die", though.<br></blockquote><div><br><font color="#ff0000">Agreed. The referendum is rather open-ended and permits a variety of governance options. Deriving from your comment earlier, the current referendum wording "authorizes" the council so the objections to binding nature are no longer on point.<br>
<br>I've seen your comment that the authorization in the referendum isn't necessary since Council already has this authority. Well, there were a variety of prior comments that its authority was only in relation to Nokia or in any event it wasn't intended that Council would be guiding a software organization without being dependent on Nokia. So you can perhaps, with your opinion of Councils previous authority, consider the referendum as clarifying.<br>
<br>Most other comments that I have seen are beyond the topic of merely "authorizing" the council to form a governance that doesn't depend on Nokia. Especially after I changed the wording to make the referendum less substantial. If you want to have the debate over the specific NFP structure, I can change the referendum back and we can do that. Otherwise, let's get on with it and not make it harder than it needs to be. I would think it is convenient that the referendum vote takes place at the same time as a council vote. <br>
</font><br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
For example, what about using an *existing* legal entity? Specifically, Nemein:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?p=1072725#post1072725" target="_blank">http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?p=1072725#post1072725</a><br>
<br>
Short version: through some mechanism would Nemein be willing to take<br>
on more with money coming in from three sources, whilst<br>
simulataneously responsible for reducing costs (and, indeed, driven<br>
to):<br>
<br>
* Community donations/subscriptions via $PAYMENT_METHOD.<br>
* Own budgets as a loss-leader to demonstrate Nemein's skills to prospects<br>
for larger contracts.<br>
* Nokia at a lower-level of money and still providing trademark usage &<br>
grants (for example).<br>
<div><div></div><div><br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Andrew<br>
<br>
--<br>
Andrew Flegg -- mailto:<a href="mailto:andrew@bleb.org" target="_blank">andrew@bleb.org</a> | <a href="http://www.bleb.org/" target="_blank">http://www.bleb.org/</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
maemo-community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:maemo-community@maemo.org" target="_blank">maemo-community@maemo.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community" target="_blank">https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>