From: Michael Curtin <curtinm@emh.kadena.af.mil>
Message-Id: <9403120932.AA01014@emh.kadena.af.mil>
Subject: Re: The recent past and the near future 
To: schuldy@zariski.harvard.edu (Mark Schuldenfrei)
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 1994 09:31:59 +0000 (JST)
Cc: hablutzelml@attmail.com, cclaus@willamette.edu, mittle@watson.ibm.com,
        antir@Kwantlen.BC.CA, sca-west@ecst.csuchico.edu,
        carolingia@bloom-beacon.mit.edu, calontir@unl.edu,
        nordmark@ludd.luth.se, northshield@stolaf.edu, e5@uriacc.uri.edu,
        sca-reform@MIT.EDU, jaymin@maths.tcd.ie, lgrant@lanczos.maths.tcd.ie,
        rgoff@mcimail.com, 71233.3035@compuserve.com, MMS6824@tntech.edu
In-Reply-To: <9403111617.AA05101@math.harvard.edu> from "Mark Schuldenfrei" at Mar 11, 94 11:17:39 am
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 6889      

       >
>   With due respect, there was nothing else under either the SCA, Inc.,
>   documents nor the laws of California that the Directors could have don
e!
>   With an undersized Board, they could take no action, including
>   consideration of the "Estrella Proclamation."  They could not either
>   alter the By-Laws to provide for a different method of selecting
>   Directors, nor could they accept persons upon whom the advisory
>   membership had not been offered the opportunity to comment.  Any perso
n
>   who had not been a Director or was not on one of the list of nominees
>   would lack that possibility.  At least there has been the possibility,

>   now or in the past, of commenting upon the persons selected.
>
> The Bylaws restrict the domain of people who can be selected to paid
> participants, over 21, etcetera.  The methodology for appointment and
> consideration is a policy.  As I wrote on the Rialto, one can violate a
> policy with no legal ramifications.
>
> Now, of course, one shouldn't violate this policy without great need.
> However, I believe that this is the first time the Board was below quoru
m,
> the first time 3 directors resigned all at once, and the Society is in
> arguably one of the deepest crisis it has been in in years.
>
> Certainly, the Board could have loosened up enough to listen to the Crow
ns.
> They certainly could have contacted all the Crowns before the meeting. A
nd
> certainly, they could have waited more than the minimum 72 hours, giving
 the
> membership some time to respond. Instead, they gave no notice at all, an
d
> avoided consultation with the Crowns.
>
>   Additionally, a corporation cannot continue without a President or
>   Treasurer, as the SCA, Inc., had been forced to do by the resignations