We are still looking at the organizational structures of an terraistic association. Today we will define the essential framework for the general assembly.
The most important organ of the association is the general assembly. It gives the president a quasi-democratic legitimation through election. Once a year the president has to report how he/she has furthered the goals of the association and intends to promote them in the future. Any change in the purpose of the association requires the approval of the general assembly. The general assembly is legitimated to dismiss the president and the whole board upon written application. To ensure continuity, a quorum above the simple majority, e.g. 75%, would be required for such an action. Otherwise there would be the danger that every annual meeting would be used for such a power vote.
In the general assembly any member may ask questions, which must be answered by the board. Subjects and proposals can also be presented and discussed in the forum. As always there will be a few stakeholders who will and wants to take the chance to promote his or her cause rather than focus on the purpose of the general assembly. That is a downside we must accept. In any case, a statement of the Council of Elders would have to be presented – with a recommendation to exonerate the management for the past and suggestions for prioritization for the future. The managing board may or may not be discharged for the past year. “Discharge of the management” means that the general meeting determines to best of its knowledge that there are no claims for damages or of enrichment against the members of the management. Such personal liability of the management members may arise if they act against the interests of the association.
The meetings should be organized digitally. This does not exclude the possibility of a larger number of interested people meeting in person. Digital participation must be possible with reasonable effort. However, because not everyone has access to the Internet at all times and because many certainly support the purpose of the statutes in the matter, but do not see themselves to be competent in specific matters, a right of assignment for votes makes sense. Like larger stock corporations, such representation would have to be obtained anew for each meeting and proven in advance. Misuse in certain cases can of course not be fully excluded. To make it more difficult for such misuse to take effect, the maximum accumulation of voting rights for the various types of members would have to be limited, for example to 2-5%.
The outlook – finally content
Up to this point it was simple and almost theoretical. The further topics and content of the association that I propose is based on some personal evaluations, world views and subject matter conclusions on my part. The setting of priorities is upü for discussion. It builds a bridge to the introductory considerations about a probable future and will build on that. This would be the perfect time to re-read some of my first posts 😉