Talk:Strategic working group/Articles of Association Review

Membership

If corporations want to be recognised supporters of OSM(F) they should donate money and that gives them a right to say "We are supporters of the OSMF". We should have a public list of donors (for those who want to be on it). With this in place, I don't see any reason why companies would want/need to be OSMF members. The 'supporter' title is also good for individuals(e.g. professionals). LastGrape/Gregory 21:03, 11 September 2011 (BST)

I don't think you should need an active OSM username. You may be part of the community only by cleaning up the wiki, or other ways. I consider being part of the foundation as enough to make you part of the community. LastGrape/Gregory 21:03, 11 September 2011 (BST)
I agree with that the person shouldn't have a blocked account. I think this should be extended to include you shouldn't have been blocked by any service run by the OSMF (this includes things like the wiki and mailing lists). - LastGrape/Gregory 21:03, 11 September 2011 (BST)

Members can propose written resolutions where they have "support of x percentage of the members submitted y days before the meeting." where x=20% and y=1 month.
- Should be 5% and 10 days, similar to personal elections. With 200 members, you need 10 signatures to suggest a proposal which is still difficult enough. 10 days is enough to deal with urgent or important proposals. --FK270673 21:06, 28 August 2011 (BST)

Individual ballots must not be published to anybody except really independent scrutineers
- Secret voting must be ensured! --FK270673 22:13, 28 August 2011 (BST)

Fully paid-up members
Members who have been member for at least 30 day prior to (start of) voting/meeting
Members must have a free choice, otherwise their vote is considered invalid

Employees who are ordered to vote for a certain candidate should not participate in voting. Though such intimidation is hard to prove, it should not be tolerated in any way. --FK270673 22:02, 28 August 2011 (BST)