[iaoa-bylaws] Statute and bylaws (v4) in Google Docs & proposal for the meeting

[Frank Loebe]

Dear all,

for tomorrow's discussion, I've produced Google-Doc versions of Statute [1]
and Bylaws [2] that are based on importing Marion's latest version (v3 in my
numbering) into Google-Drive and adding Fabians comments (from v2 in my
numbering and from an email by him today) as well as a few remarks of my own
(just what I came across, unsystematically only, I'm sorry). I'm referring
to this as version 4.

I would propose to directly edit/comment on these Google Docs tomorrow, as
we go. I'd ask you to avoid changes to the actual body of text before the
meeting. If you were to add more comments beforehand (which should be fine),
please login to Google before you start editing or commenting, such that the
origin of changes or comments is correctly assigned. (NB: I'm not sure
whether access should be more restrictive than it is now, where knowing
[1,2] suffices - lacking experience, I'd be grateful for any advice in this
regard.)

Moreover, I think in the last EC meeting I suggested that we clarify first
how severe the changes may be that we would allow us to make. Meanwhile, I'd
like to propose a different approach to the meeting, namely to start with
the details straight-away (at least initially), i.e., going through the
items/places that are marked in the documents and through the comments. I
would expect that we can then better see which issues and what types of
changes everyone has in mind for which phrases/fragments. We may record
items without immediate/quick consensus and revisit these in another pass,
then possibly after more general discussion.

With an initial general-level discussion I'd now see a threat in
spending(losing?) much(?) time there, with significant potential for
misunderstandings "in the abstract", possibly despite similar solutions for
concrete cases (and no progress there). I think that we are all similarly
aware of major pros and major cons of additional changes. The same applies
to some extent to the two main positions/tendencies, where I would see these
two ends of the spectrum of our opinions:
(1) "minimal changes, only those which are indispensable for becoming a
Swiss association" and
(2) "try to minimize changes, but allowing for fixing 'known bugs' in our
documents (possibly including decreasing complications that are purely due
to Italian law), if the resulting changes have sufficiently
local/calculable/assessable effects". 

Overall, I think we actually strive for similar goals. Hence it may be
useful to proceed "in levels" - first agree on where we have consensus and
then discuss differences after we have a good picture of the actual cases.
Of course, all of that is just a proposal for our consideration.

Best regards,
Frank


[1] v4-statute
 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UGLqlTrUk5xGEa6PAUOT1_kMnHxAulecriLzR0Sw
nH8/edit?usp=sharing

[2] v4-bylaws
 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1utSFvY-qViARwO8UW2UW0yuLuvzZdWIy6BJT2P5M
SXY/edit?usp=sharing