You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   50-74   65-89   90-114   115-139   140-164   165-189   190-214 
 215-225          
 
Author Message
25 new of 225 responses total.
gelinas
response 90 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 00:59 UTC 2003

Physical presence is no longer required for service on the Board
of Directors.  A membership vote last year answered this question.
The question voted on allowed participartion over a speaker 'phone.

No one has yet served from afar.
bhoward
response 91 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 01:51 UTC 2003

Really?  Cool!  I've been looking for a way to get more involved with
contributing to grex.

I'd like to formally nominate myself to run for one of the open BOD
positions.
naftee
response 92 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 04:51 UTC 2003

I second that nomination.  I think Bruce Howard would be an excellent addition
to the GreX B0D and encourage everyone to vote for him.
remmers
response 93 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 11:30 UTC 2003

Current nominees (with those who've accepted marked with a *):

          cmcgee
        * jp2
        * kip
        * glenda
        * mary
          tod
          polygon
        * slynne
        * bhelliom
          krj
          naftee
          srw
        * bhoward

Seven candidates at this point for four open slots.  It's shaping
up to be a competitive election.
mynxcat
response 94 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 15:36 UTC 2003

Just a quick question - is there a limit to the number of people who can be
on board but not physically present at board meetings? If you have a limit
of 1, you have bhoward and jp2 running for that position. So only one of these
people can be voted to board. 
aruba
response 95 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 16:23 UTC 2003

There is not a limit.  Technical arrangements may get tricky with more than
one remote attendee, but I think we can work it out.
naftee
response 96 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 16:49 UTC 2003

re 93 I'm not eligible to run for the board.
remmers
response 97 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 17:06 UTC 2003

Because...?
carson
response 98 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 19:12 UTC 2003

("!members")

(there's also likely the issue of being a non-resident of the USA.
I'm not compelled to look up the relevant text.)
glenda
response 99 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 20:09 UTC 2003

Add that he is underage.
jp2
response 100 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 21:18 UTC 2003

This response has been erased.

naftee
response 101 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 11 22:49 UTC 2003

Unfourtunately, I haven't paid for membership. Due to the rather precarious
state of GreX accounts at the moment, I'm not really compelled to become one
at the moment.
maximuzs
response 102 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 12 07:35 UTC 2003

Although I have not been  a paid member myself, I owould love to participate
in thie election.  If all possible, I nominate myself.  I have sused to run
a non-profit organization and am film. with fed. laws regarding tax issues.
thank you for your time.
remmers
response 103 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 12 12:11 UTC 2003

Jp2 is correct - a board of directors of a Michigan corporation
can have a limited number of members who are under 18, as long as
they are at least 16.  I think the "limited number" might be 1.
This is due to fairly recent changes in Michigan law.
remmers
response 104 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 12 13:40 UTC 2003

Re #95:  Timing issues could be tricky as well if the remote member
is in a time zone significantly distant from Ann Arbor.
jp2
response 105 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 12 14:40 UTC 2003

This response has been erased.

jp2
response 106 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 12 14:46 UTC 2003

This response has been erased.

bhoward
response 107 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 12 15:34 UTC 2003

John, it depends a bit on the distance and whether they are based to
the right or left of Ann Arbor. 

Someone based in the UK would probably have a fair amount of difficulty
attending from afar unless they were a night person - a meeting held
~19:00 EST is around midnight in the UK depending on time of year.

On the other hand, 19:00 EST is more like 08:00 or 09:00 in Tokyo which
for me is actually quite a manageable time.
mynxcat
response 108 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 12 16:07 UTC 2003

Again, you would expect the nominee to take the time difference into 
consideration in deciding whether he wants to run. For me, an 8:00 am 
time for a meeting would not work, but a midnight time is definitely 
more manageable :)

My point is it's the nominee's call to make, not the board's. Of 
course, a responsible person would decline the nomination if the time 
did not work for him. 
richard
response 109 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 13 19:32 UTC 2003

cmon, nominations close on saturday, there are seven nominees for four
slots..surely a couple of more people want to run so there can at least be
twice as many nominees as there are open seats
mynxcat
response 110 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 13 21:15 UTC 2003

Why don't you run?
gelinas
response 111 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 13 21:30 UTC 2003

(I'm hoping C. S. McGee will consent to to her nomination.)
remmers
response 112 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 13 23:47 UTC 2003

(Me too, since I nominated her.)

Deadlines:

  November 15:  Last day to place names into nomination.
  November 30:  Last day for a nominee to accept (and acquire
                membership status, if they're not already a member).

remmers
response 113 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 17 12:39 UTC 2003

November 15 has passed, so no new names may be placed in nomination.
Any nominee who has not yet accepted has through November 30 to do so.
I've emailed cmcgee, tod, polygon, krj, and srw alerting them to this.
tod
response 114 of 225: Mark Unseen   Nov 17 16:56 UTC 2003

This response has been erased.

 0-24   25-49   50-74   65-89   90-114   115-139   140-164   165-189   190-214 
 215-225          
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

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