This item text has been erased.

71 responses total.

I don't think so.  As far as I know, the information I gave Grex to verify
my membership is not public information.  

If you get a court order forcing Grex to reveal my address then they may. 
Otherwise, no deal.

This response has been erased.

Out of curiosity, I'd like to know the purpose for which you wish to 
obtain this list.

This response has been erased.

What #1 said.  

Why do you need the addresses to establish if a quorum will be 
established? Unless you plan on contacting all members personally and 
urging them to vote.

And to establish if a quorum was established after the election has 
taken place, all you need is the number of members and the number of 
members that voted. I don't think there would be a problem with that 
(you can get the number of members through the !members program). But 
remmers would be the right person to know if he can share the voting 
numbers information.

This response has been erased.

When the election is over, I always report the number of members
who voted.

From Jamie's reference:

        2) If the requirements of this section have not been complied
        with, on demand of a shareholder or member in person or by proxy,
        who in good faith challenges the existence of sufficient votes to
        carry any action at the meeting, the meeting shall be adjourned
        until the requirements are complied with. Failure to comply with
        the requirements of this section does not affect the validity of
        an action taken at the meeting before the making of such a demand.

On what ground do you contend there are not sufficient votes to elect
directors?

Remember, the challenger must have "good faith."

This response has been erased.

Maybe he's planning on a bulk mail campaign to promote his candidacy.

This response has been erased.

This response has been erased.

How did you determine the quorum?

This response has been erased.

In that case, you may find the following of interest:

 History of Amendments:  
 
 January 12, 1995:  Articles 4d, 4e, 5b, and 7  (eliminating quorum
                    criteria)

The bylaws were amended specifically to NOT require a quorum for elections
or other voting.

This response has been erased.

I don't agree.  It seems to me that a statement that quorum criteria have
been removed is a positive statement that no quorum is required.

Unfortunately, the coop with the amendment is apparently not on line,
so I can't look at what was actually approved.

"Unless a greater or lesser quorum is provided in the articles of 
incorporation, in a bylaw adopted by the shareholders or members, or 
in this act, shares or members entitled to cast a majority of the 
votes at a meeting constitute a quorum at the meeting."

Interesting.  Can our system of asynchronous online voting be 
properly considered a "meeting"?  I doubt there is legal precedent 
to establish the case.

I'll just read in the text of that vote.  It is found
at /usr/local/grexdoc/archives/votes/vote03 .

  PROPOSAL:

  I propose that the Grex Bylaws be amended as follows:

  Articles 4d, 4e, 5b and 7 should be changed to delete the reference
  to any requirement that a specified percentage of the membership must
  vote for an election to be valid.

  Current wording:
    4d.  Nominations will be submitted by November 15th and elections
         held between the 1st and 15th of December for terms to
         commence January 1st.  2/3 of the membership must vote for
         the election to be valid.  The nominees receiving the most
         votes will be appointed to the BOD.

  Proposed wording:
    4d.  Nominations will be submitted by November 15th and elections
         held between the 1st and 15th of December for terms to
         commence January 1st.  The nominees receiving the most
         votes will be appointed to the BOD.

  Current wording:
    4e.  A BOD member shall be removed from office if they resign,
         not be available for meetings or respond to BOD
         communications for a period of four months, or be voted out
         of office by a vote of the membership, with 2/3 of the
         membership voting and 3/4 of the ballots cast in favor of
         removal.

  Proposed wording:
    4e.  A BOD member shall be removed from office if they resign,
         not be available for meetings or respond to BOD
         communications for a period of four months, or be voted out
         of office by a vote of the membership, with 3/4 of the
         ballots cast in favor of removal.

  Current wording:
    5b.  A motion will be considered to have passed if, and only if,
         at least 50% of the membership has cast a ballot, and more
         votes were cast in favor than against.

  Proposed wording:
    5b.  A motion will be considered to have passed if more
         votes were cast in favor than against, except as provided
         for bylaw amendments.

  Current wording:
    7.   Amendments to these bylaws may be proposed and voted upon  at any
         time according to the procedures of Article 5a. In order for a
         proposed amendment to take effect, 2/3 of the membership must
         vote, with a 3/4 majority voting in favor of the change.

  Proposed wording:
    7.   Amendments to these bylaws may be proposed and voted upon  at any
         time according to the procedures of Article 5a. In order for a
         proposed amendment to take effect, a 3/4 majority voting in favor
         of the change is required.


VOTE RESULTS:

Results posted on Thursday, January 12, 1995.
64 of 83 eligible voters cast ballots.
Results:  55 For   9 Against
The bylaw amendment passed.

I'm afraid jp2 is bringing to Grex the latest round of contributions he 
has presented to M-Net; nitpicking designed to make it more difficult 
to administer the system.  I hope Grex won't get mired in this 
garbage.  I'm happy to say that M-Net, which is more susceptible to it, 
hasn't paid much attention to it, either.

Jamie appears desperate for someone to think he's clever.  I suppose he 
is -- but how much more clever it would be to make some sort of 
positive contribution.

This response has been erased.

It's not broken.  I'm for leaving it alone.

me too.

Jamie - a complete list of Grex's members can be obtained with the "members"
command.

WOW, REALLY ARUBA?@@

lol try cat /etc/passwd

This response has been erased.

It's more than sufficient for your purposes.

This response has been erased.

What's your point?  Is there one, or are you just attempting to make
things as difficult as possible for staff?  You seem to come up with an
endless stream of these minor, apparently pointless issues to complain
about.

This response has been erased.

(You're admitting that we were right then?  Or you lost an if?)

If you want to know member's addresses then send them
email explaining why you want it.  If they share that
information with you, great.

But if the member doesn't want to share it, then Grex
certainly isn't going to do so either.  But you knew
that.

Your move.

This response has been erased.

Jamie, what are you trying to accomplish?

Yeah, really.  What the hell is your point?  Can you possible imagine
that we're stupid enough to believe thet you think you're trying to do
something good for Grex with this nonsense?  

This response has been erased.

Re #36: I think this must be part of Jamie's grand plan to recruit more
members for Grex by making membership more attractive.

No, wait...

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss