A couple of comment on my behalf on the Association process:

- I agree with datendelphin that we have been covering quite some grounds without any association for the past years. However, I see the advantage of having some sort of formalisation by means of an association: Dealing with other parties, such as governments, companies or other organisations is considerably easier if you have the osm_ch formally behind you rather than to to it on your own, personal behalf. For our internal organisation I would wish that the association somewhat increases transparency as well as responsibility of current activities (even if our mailing-list will probably remain the main communication channel).

In the discussion it was stated that the association might become a local chapter of the OSMF. I currently only see limited advantages, while it seems to be associated with quite some additional tasks (eg reporting) if I look at the proposed agreement  between OSMF and the local chapter [1]. So becoming a local chapter wouldn't be too high on my priority list.

Therefore, I would support creating the association, but to keep it as lean as possible and the bylaws as flexible as possible.

On the bylaws:

Member exclusion procedure:

I would opt to keep the para on the exclusion (no justification required) for the time being. In further stages we should think about a bit more elaborate, transparent (and fair) procedure. But I think this will be easier, once we have some experience. I don't think its appropriate to formulate some fancy exclusion procedures now, if we are not really aware of the problems and its context.

Purpose:

- I agree with Simon, that the phrase on the type of activities (non-/commercial/profit) does not clearly refer to the people, projects, etc. To my interpretation, it rather refers to the support and promotion. Why not just drop the second sentence?

- Simon suggests to drop the third sentence (The Association itself is not profit-oriented.) since no association may be profit-oriented according to Swiss law. If becoming a OSMF local chapter will be an option it might be not a bad idea to keep the sentence in, since OSMF puts quite some emphasis on "non-profit" (whatever this means), see the preamble in [1]. Additionally, it might not hurt to keep it in, in order to indicate that we are not an industry association or something similar (as stated by Simon).

General assembly:

- Let's assume the AGM takes place within the first half of the year, e.g. on 15 May. Does it make sense to approve a budget of the current year of which already more than four months have passed? 

The auditors:

- A check based upon random sampling is to be conducted. Shouldn't this check be part of the financial report, and thus the bylaws should refer to it?

Liability:

- Reading the respective article [2] of the ZGB, it seems to me that this section is not required at all.

That's it for the moment

Marc

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/Agreement

[2] http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/210/a75a.html