[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] [SLOBS] [SLOB] another motion (Quispe trip to Translation Summit)

[Dave Crossland]

Hi

On 18 May 2016 at 11:53, Sean DALY <sdaly.be at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Dave Crossland <dave at lab6.com> wrote:
>
>> FWIW I think this is reasonable, since the board have shared and equal
>> financial responsibility for the Conservancy account.
>
>
> In my view it's theoretically reasonable, however there is a real risk of
> red tape logjam. It's quite common for orgs to set a reasonable amount
> limit for expenditures not requiring formal votes, to reduce bureaucratic
> delays (i.e. waiting for the next meeting then spending time on it). It's
> also quite common for all such expenses to be accounted for anyway, and for
> the limit to be adjusted up or down per requirements, to better focus on
> the important issues at hand.
>

While it is common to have such a limit, and despite SLOBs apparently
already authorising such a limit for Walter (who with Bernie has a de facto
special position of trust as a co-founder) it seems Conservancy is a higher
authority than SLOBs and requires a board vote for any spending.

Fortunately, SLOBs votes are done via email, at any time, and the monthly
SLOBs meetings are there to unjam any backlogs.

-- 
Cheers
Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20160518/8bf08c78/attachment.html>