<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Hi Venka,<br>
Based on your comments, I've added the following to
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process#Responsibilities">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process#Responsibilities</a><br>
<i>"TBD: As of mid 2014, there has been some suggestions on board
and discuss email lists about using web based voting tools to have
OSGeo Charter members vote o specific OSGeo issues. Agreement and
details are yet to be finalised.</i>"<br>
<br>
More inline:<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/08/2014 9:53 am, Venkatesh
Raghavan wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:53EE9D87.802@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp" type="cite">Hi
Jeff,
<br>
<br>
On 2014/08/16 2:06, Jeff McKenna wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Hi Venka,
<br>
<br>
I agree, that the new Board should consider assigning more
responsibilities to our Charter Members. What potential types
of "crucial issues" could you see involving the Charter Members
down the road? Do you have any examples?
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
About "crucial issues" there a many, one of the recent example was
the new rules for
<br>
Charter Member (CM) Election. I think that the rules of the CM
election needs a broad
<br>
consensus from the membership and cannot be changed by board
decision alone.
<br>
How can the board change the rules of CM elections when it is CMs
that elect
<br>
the board in the first place?
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Venka, I agree that it is important for decisions from the OSGeo
Board to be inclusive and draw upon the best opinions from within
the OSGeo community.<br>
However, excessive openness comes at a cost to the community due the
time invested by each community member in describing an issue,
understanding the issue, debating the issue, voting, then processing
the votes.<br>
A board needs to strike a balance between being open and encouraging
input, verses taking responsibility and pragmatically making
decisions on behalf of the community so the community can get on
with what they enjoy and do best (such as writing code).<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:53EE9D87.802@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp" type="cite">
<br>
With the revised election process item 6 [1], 5% vote of charter
membership to become CM
<br>
is making the hurdle so low that it makes the whole election
process (one that Jorge has worked
<br>
so very hard) a waste of time and effort. Can someone point me to
a volunteer organization
<br>
where one could be elected by getting mere 5% vote from the
electorate?
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Selecting a voting process is an example of overhead which has
potential to draw people away from doing productive OSGeo
activities.<br>
The important thing for OSGeo is that a voting process exists. Yes,
some options are better than others, but a near enough solution will
suffice. 100 people contributing might result in a better voting
process. Indeed, 20 or so people added valuable input into our
latest voting process, which resulted in a better process than the
original proposal. But is OSGeo significantly better because it has
a better voting process? Or would OSGeo be more valuable if everyone
had been focusing on improving their OSGeo projects instead?<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:53EE9D87.802@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp" type="cite">
<br>
I suggest that the new board that will start functioning soon to
revisit CM election rules
<br>
(which, I think, is a "crucial issue") and after seek broader
consensus from the charter members
<br>
(through electronic voting of necessary) re-formulate these rules.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I think it would be good for the board to OCCASIONALLY consider
inviting charter members to vote on an issue. However, engaging
charter members should only be done rarely, say once or twice a
year, and only after there has been time to debate and refine issues
on osgeo-discuss. The board should be respecting the time of the
OSGeo community, and in most cases, shoulder the responsibility and
often time consuming task of making decisions on behalf of the
community. That is what the board has been elected to do.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:53EE9D87.802@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp" type="cite">
<br>
Please note that I raise the issue about a process and not against
any individual.
<br>
I am very pleased to see great new team of CM has entered OSGeo, I
am also glad
<br>
to see the excellent list of nominees for the Board elections.
<br>
<br>
Venka
<br>
<br>
[1] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process_2014#Nominations">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process_2014#Nominations</a>
<br>
<br>
P.S. I could have made my views on the new CM election rules
earlier. I did not realize
<br>
that rules has changed until the election process had started and
refrained from expressing
<br>
my views until the elections were over. Perhaps there are others
who feel the same as me
<br>
and I urge them to speak up now, so that we could make our
community better.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Venka, it is possible that you haven't had sufficient time to keep
up with all the activity on the OSGeo Discuss email list - where the
voting process was discussed and refined.<br>
This is understandable. It is quite a time commitment to keep up
with email traffic, and too much traffic leads to community members
dropping off the email list. This is something that a board needs to
consider when engaging OSGeo Charter members. If we ask a lot of the
Charter Members, we will find the membership drops off.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:53EE9D87.802@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp" type="cite">
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<br>
-jeff
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2014-08-15 10:39 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<br>
As I have mentioned on many occasions before, I hope that our
Charter
<br>
Members will be assigned more responsibilities in future
decision making
<br>
on some crucial issues. Now that we have tested our new voting
system,
<br>
it could also be used to seek broad based consensus form our
excellent
<br>
Charter Membership on some some of these crucial issues.
<br>
<br>
Venka
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
</blockquote>
_______________________________________________
<br>
Board mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
Board mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
P +61 2 9009 5000, W <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.lisasoft.com">www.lisasoft.com</a>, F +61 2 9009 5099</pre>
</body>
</html>