a) it -may- allow us to setup the foundation more quickly, at
least we are not blocking on a fairly artificial timeline
I think if so, it just would delay two weeks, IMHO noncritical after this amount of time.
b) it adds a staggered election into the process from founding,
such that we are not electing the MC and the Board at the
same time - which IMHO is critical anyway
That's indeed a very good thing.
So - I too would prefer to stick with the MC we have, and elect it
shortly after founding.
So, we have two choices:
1. Either vote now and have a newly voted-on MC for the legal setup.
2. Keep the existing MC and they do a gentleman's agreement to step back by let's say June or July 1st next year.
Legally, it's no problem, since the Founder (FrODeV) simply nominates those who should be in charge, for elections thereafter, however, the official voting rules in the statutes are enforced.
However, for #2, we need either a replacement for Thorsten and a decision by the BoD to go with less MC members (even with Thorsten's replacement, the current MC only has 3 members and two deputies, but we would need five plus two), or a more MC members.
André, can you talk to the MC tonight and see what they prefer and make a proposal? If the BoD then votes on it, we should be good to go.