[Board] [OSGeo-Standards] Status of the 10 OGC slots for OSGeo members

[Bob Basques]

All,

Has any progress been made on this since this thread cooled off?

bobb


On 08/14/2012 05:55 PM, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> If I recall from my original thoughts on this...
>
> * A Token Oversight and Allocation Committee (TOAC) would act on behalf of the OSGeo Board to track allocation, usage, 
> and revocation of the tokens. The TOAC would consist of 2-3 folks, including at least one OSGeo board member and one 
> OGC staff person. TOAC members to volunteer, and should have both OSGeo and OGC experience. OSGeo Board to appoint 
> initial TOAC chair, etc, just like other osgeo committees operate.
>
> * TOAC should rarely require any actual meetings; emails should suffice.
>
> * Requests for tokens would be made by email, with an explanation of what the token would be used for and why OSGeo 
> should care. TOAC should respond promptly to requests.
>
> * Tokens would be allocated allocated for a fixed period of time (6-12 months?). After that period, the token holder 
> would be required to report on his or her use of the token -- nothing onerous, just an email to the TOAC explaining 
> what he is doing in OGC-land and why OSGeo should care.
>
> * Renewals for tokens should be simple -- as long as no one else is waiting for a token, and as long as the token 
> holder is reporting that he is doing Good and Useful Stuff, then another 6-12 months should be granted.
>
> * Token requestors may be any OSGeo community member (need not be a Charter member or whatever).
>
> * TOAC should report regularly (6-12 months) to OSGeo board and OGC mgmt on use of the tokens. Again, just a decent 
> email would suffice.
>
> * In the event of token demand exceeding token supply, the TOAC should arbitrate based on both (1) how long each token 
> has been in use by one person and (2) hope valuable the usage of that token has been. TOAC to use a consensus-based 
> approach, based on token usage supporting the goals of the foundation.
>
> -mpg
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20120829/c98f2624/attachment.htm>