[members-discuss] amendment proposal for the Article of association

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:13:00AM +0100, James Blessing wrote:

>I think that the 2% limit is about the right level for something to be
>"forced" onto the agenda.

Could someone clarify whether this means 2% of all members or 2% of 
those who have registered for the GM? 
If the former, this may never be possible to achieve - at RIPE63, the 
turnout for even a contentious issue as RPKI was below 5% of membership.
Over 95% of the membership don't even bother to vote, they are not 
likely to participate in an agenda battle.

If it is the latter, the threshold may even be too low to prevent hi-
jacking (for the same reason).

>If that's the case maybe creating a process for the EB to consider
>motions with a lower submission threshold might be more appropriate (if
>there isn't one already)? The EB could be free to amend or reject any
>suggestion as they see fit and if the EB decide not to progress it you
>can always follow the direct route above.

I think this is the current situation and may be acceptable if there 
were transparency as to who proposed which items and how such proposals
were disposed of...

rgds,
Sascha Luck