but i don’t read @ArthurD’s comment as an accusation. It COULD be interpreted in more than one way. He could simply be informing you of a potential future problem with Companies House.
According to the Articles, aren’t you supposed to contact all MEMBERs, not just the Directors? In which case, he’s right, and you will have a problem when you go to register the changes with Companies House.
The requirements about informing the members about meetings, and how meetings are run, are one of the main methods that fraud could take place. This is one of the loopholes that i was talking about. It would be incredibly easy for any of the directors to commit fraud legally, because of how the rules are structured.
I’ve been bouncing idea’s for exploiting these loopholes off a legal advisor i know professionally. He’s found other loopholes that i missed, because he has more experience of this sort of thing. It’ll be quite entertaining for him to watch how the current conversations have been going…
And the way that these conversations have been taking place, is a measure of the lack of oversight that is encoded in the Articles of Edgeryders LBG.
As i understand it, this goes against the transparency problems that Edgeryders was originally set up to solve.
And a lawyer. So, I am inclined to consider his interpretation quite solid.
The Articles were drafted by Arthur, the only one of us (pre-Patrick) with any experience on UK law. If you have suggestions, send them over. No promise to adopt them – it is our company and has to work for us.
unCharacteristically Davies has cracked the Anti Spam thread open, only to be left all alone by people who find such things completely unacceptable.
I’m repeating myself, but want to get us back to square one:
So the issue has become where to find a clean slate and a fresh beginning - jettisoning a few people on the way. This does happen for various reasons. It should not be one of our specialities.
The question is why would a personable, loyal, hard working soul such as Arthur become exasperated as he witnessed internal developments in an organisation he had so carefully helped to build.
Answering this question can also be jettisoned, but it behooves an organisation with any wish to stand forth as an agent for progressive social movements to do the opposite.
Hi Bembo, I think this question goes to @ArthurD. We don’t know much of his reasoning, his resignation letter was short and explained only in what capacity he is willing to move forward.
He said he will make it into a public announcement, but that hasn’t happened yet for reasons I don’t know.
… but one is solved. I refer, of course, to the problem of Arthur’s relationship with the company he had helped to found. He solved it by removing himself from it. Rightly, no one else got a vote on his decision (not even his co-founders), as this was his life and his choice to make. This has left behind some bad blood. It happens. It is unfortunate, but it is far from a tragedy. As for me, if I want to solve personal issues I do not do it on a public platform.
On the subject of LOTE5, unMonastery Athens is working on a plan. We wanted to finish it tomorrow, but I drop here the ‘Introduction’ and post where we are at the moment in a separate post. I think this would be the perfect backdrop for the facilitated peacemaking efforts suggested by Kei and Nadia. Working together on something tangible.
Brilliant Proposal for the Gathering of the EdgeRyder Forces
Living on the Edge \#5 - Athens, late September 2015
For our milestone fifth LOTE unMonastery Athens offers to host and promote a dynamic event in which form equals content and seeks to represent in practice everything we stand for.
As our perennial central plank, the theme proposed is Social Cohesion - Survival Strategies. This year we carry the ER operating premise one step further: ‘them that builds the infrastructure calls the shots.’ LOTE#5 will take place in a temporary hexayurt village calling upon open source expertise to meet all our needs.
In 2012 EdgeRyders was inaugurated by the opening Living On the Edge conference in Strasbourg at the Council of Europe, cradled by the Social Cohesion Research and Early Warning Division. At that first conference we explored our collective future through the lens of collapse and sustained austerity - despite the relative stability since then in Northern Europe, potential and real crisis remains in our midst.
In the spirit of staying with the trouble, LOTE5 will see a return to our early roots in order to examine what we have achieved since then, with a step closer to the edge, with the time that has past since our early visions we have experimented and prototyped; unMonastery, Makerfox, hexayurts, new organisational forms and we propose that now is the time for a meaningful road test of that infrastructure under conditions that require it’s creation, with an open invitation to new collaborators to join us in structuring a useful constellation of resources in the LOTE5 Survival Village.