== SGM Call and Quorum Size ==

=== Intro ===

26(2)  In preparation for many more members, it has been made easier to call an SGM.  Before it was 5%.  Now it is 5% or 20 members, whichever is less.  So when we get beyond 400 members, 20 members will be able to call an SGM, and we won't need to round up 5% of the entire western world to do it.

28(2) at a General Meeting we need 15 people to be a quorum, not 5.

=== Motion to be voted on (New Text) ===

'''By deleting rule(26)(2) and inserting in its place:'''
{{{
(2) The committee must, on the requisition in writing or by digitally
    signed email, of at least 5 per cent of the total number of members
    or 20 members, whichever is less, convene a special general meeting
    of the association.
}}}

'''By deleting the word "Five" from rule 28(2) and inserting "Fifteen".'''

=== Motion to be voted on (New Text, Werners and Alexanders Version) ===

'''Change rule 26(2) to:'''
{{{
(2) The committee must, on the requisition in writing or by digitally
    signed email, of at least 10 per cent of the total number of members
    with a maximum of 20 and a minimum of 3, convene a special general
    meeting of the association.
}}}

=== Old Text ===

=== Comments ===

 * [[comma/Community/HomePagesMembers/DanielBlack|DanielBlack]]: The plan was to get active members. Rounding up 5% of active member's shouldn't be that hard.
 * [[comma/Community/HomePagesMembers/DanielBlack|DanielBlack]]: Calling a SGM shouldn't be absolutely easy. There have been far too many SGMs in CAcerts history and discouraging them is a good thing - as such I've proposed [[AGM/RuleChange/SpecialGeneralMeetingMinimiumMemberRequest]].
 * [[Iang]]: I'm not sure how we can come to that conclusion:
   * the [[SGM/SGM20070525|2007 SGM]] (which I chaired on invitation) was the only way we could think of of getting the Association restarted.
   * the [[SGM/SGM20080404|2008 SGM]] looks as though it was necessary as well as uncontroversial (from my outsider's viewpoint).
   * The [[SGM/SGM20090725|2009 SGM]]:  maybe it is too early to know whether we feel it was necessary.  It clearly wasn't unnecessary, as a majority sided with the important changes.  It was the first faction v. faction general meeting, so there may be a reaction against that.
 * [[Iang]]: as a thought experiment, how many is too many?  And why?  Is one a month too many?  Probably :)  But one a quarter?  Public corporations are supposed to release quarterly results, why not CAcert?  Just a thought experiment....
 * [[Werner]]: We have to look in both directions. It should be not too easy to call a SGM but it should not to hard either. As the number of members increase, the rate of inactive members increases too. So I suggest a minimum of 3 members and a maximum of 20 member and a ramp of 10% between them. That means, up to 30 members a quorum of 3 members is required, from 30 members to 200 members a quorum of 10% of members is required and above 200 member a quorum of 20 members is required.