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

[Michael Gruninger]

Hello Frank,
sounds like an excellent strategy.

thanks for setting up the Google-Doc.

- michael

On 14-07-30 2:21 PM, Frank Loebe wrote:
> 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
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: https://listserv.ovgu.de/pipermail/iaoa-bylaws/
> To join:      please email the chairs or to: info[at]iaoa.org
> IAOA wiki:    http://ontolog-02.cim3.net/wiki/IAOA
> IAOA website: http://iaoa.org
>
>