[frivoal]

The notion that non profit boards are self appointed and answerable to nobody doesn't seem universal. In the model I am familiar with (the French one), non profits typically have broad and open membership, and that membership elects the board. In fact, I find it difficult to find non-profit with self appointed boards to be quite as legitimate. While the board doesn't actually own equity as shareholders would in a for profit, since they are answerable to nobody, they effectively run the organization for their own sake. They might have a charitable agenda, but there isn't much holding them to it.

[jessriedel]

Who would be the members of a non-profit that fundraises and awards grants for scientific research? Or a non-profit that runs a food bank?

[Adrox]

Usually there is a membership fee for 10/100/1000$ a year, for people that want to regularly contribute.

[jessriedel]

But there are lots of organizations that don’t collect fees from a broad membership base like this. Most scientific research funding comes from a small number of large donors. It wouldn’t make sense to give equal voting rights to all donors if their donations are of very different amounts. Are all these French nonprofits allocating votes proportional to donation size?