[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

(Administrative) Shall we continue as a Society ...



Dear Ajay,

Thanks for taking the pains to let us know about the alternative
mechanisms to operate this project (Trust). That method sounds really
flexible. At the same time, I think it is a good idea to have a real Board
with each Board member fully authorized to speak on behalf of IPI.

Now, it appears that we have 8 members now: Antony (he can attend meetings
once a year), Jal, Parth, Prof. Roy, Rajeev, Vikram and Vijay and you. Now
we have one more than legally needed. Time for you to quit!

Well, on a serious note, maybe one of Vikram and Vijay - whoever has been
participating actively with us (Vikram, I believe?), could be there with
us for purposes of the rules, and Vijay could join IPI later.
Alternatively, if you feel that we need 8 members, then go for 8! If you
find that the needs of the existing law are satisfied, then we are "in
business" as they say. 

I think the time has now come to finalize the rules and register quickly
so that people who wish can put in some money to hire a staff member who
will start compiling addresses. If you propose a very broad outline of the
draft, then we can discuss and finalize. Please keep the provision that
MOST decisions will have to be ratified by he subscribers (henceforth
called members?) of IP discussion list through debate. Accounts, getting
office work done, etc., and direct publicity will be carried out by the
Board. The Board will also be listed in the letter-head, along with as
many others as we can squeeze in. 

These are some more suggestions:

We should keep provision for annual rotation of Board members, except the
Executive Director/ Secretary (who is the key link to the system: the
accounts, the office, etc.), to allow us to honor - and involve - those
who might have made major contributions in due course. We could also
expand the Board to a much larger size (21?) in due course, as more of
those living in India get actively involved. So let us make the rules for
increasing the size of the Board easy to implement.

We can also have official, non-voting, positions like Non-Resident Vice
President, Non Resident Virtual Board member, Advisor, and Patron, to
allow us to include a wider variety of people: in fact, ANYONE who wishes
to participate in doing something for IPI should have a place. We could
have a general position called, Associate, IPI, which would be higher than
that of Member: basically for those who wish to expand the debates by
directly meeting people; those who actively participate in this work.

These are mere thoughts. Based on your vast experience please work out a
legally acceptable, and convenient, solution. We are starting an
experiment in internet association. This might become a major
trend-setter. But let us note that the association is a mere tool, and not
an end in itself. It should be functional above all. The objective:
Hosting a National Debate and changing public opinion to accept the best
policies that are thrown up by this debate. All these things are very
difficult in themselves. This is that challenge we have taken up and so be
it!

Thanks, 
Sanjeev





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a posting to India_Policy Discussion list:  debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------