<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2014/08/19 8:32, Cameron Shorter
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABqeU+j=JwX6z9YKT9HrWtqyP_Dw8ybndHPM5aKHK43FQWZCuA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Further to Jeff and Venka's suggestion that nominees should need more than
5% of YES votes, I'd like to ask:
"Under what conditions should a candidate be denied OSGeo Charter
Membership?"</pre>
</blockquote>
Membership is denied to those who do not get "Yes" for a sizable
part<br>
(simple majority) of the electorate.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABqeU+j=JwX6z9YKT9HrWtqyP_Dw8ybndHPM5aKHK43FQWZCuA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I feel any person who is perceived to be working against the ideals of
OSGeo should be denied membership, such as people pushing for a hostile
take over. I'd be surprised to see such people fitting OSGeo Positive
Attributes [1].</pre>
</blockquote>
Working against ideals of the foundation is non-issue if one is not
a elected member of <br>
the foundation. The problem arises when a CM, elected by a sizable
number of the electorate,<br>
works against the ideals of the Foundation. In that case appropriate
steps needs<br>
to be taken (in consultation with the electorate to "disqualify" the
member<br>
form being part of the foundation. Whether someone possess "Positive
Attributes"<br>
or not will also be reflected if/when a sizable part of the
electorate feels the same way.<br>
<br>
If we want an very "non-restrictive" selection criteria, there will
not be a need for an<br>
election process.<br>
<br>
I (and, I think, some others who have expressed their views on this
thread) are <br>
wary of the present criteria of setting "Yes" vote requirement at
5%.<br>
<br>
Venka<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABqeU+j=JwX6z9YKT9HrWtqyP_Dw8ybndHPM5aKHK43FQWZCuA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
There may be some people looking for the prestige of charter membership,
who are not intending to contribute to OSGeo. These people probably
wouldn't fit OSGeo Positive Attributes [1], but even if they did, they
would not likely harm the goals of OSGeo. I don't see an issue with
accidentally including a few people from this category in our membership.
Everyone else who fits OSGeo Positive Attributes [1] will be valuable to
include in our membership and it would be detrimental to accidentally
exclude (and potentially offend) these people due to overly restrictive
selection criteria.
As such, I'd be wary of changing criteria much from what we already have.
[1] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process#Positive_Attributes">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process#Positive_Attributes</a>.
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Jorge Sanz <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jsanz@osgeo.org"><jsanz@osgeo.org></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">2014-08-18 22:47 GMT+02:00 Even Rouault <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:even.rouault@spatialys.com"><even.rouault@spatialys.com></a>:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi Jeff,
Do you mean that seconding should be a requirement ? Wouldn't make it
complicated to extend the community to countries where there are not
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">already so
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">many Charter members ? And with so many nominations, that might
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">transform the
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">discuss mailing list into a high volume list where we get lost in the
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">flow of
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">emails.
Even
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Also thinking out loud on this, with so many nominations this year I
(and from what I was told later, many others did this as well) relied on
seconds/support emails for several of my votes. If a nominee does not
have any visible support (other than the original nomination) from any
other community member, should that nomination be automatically rejected
by the CRO? Just wondering the community's thoughts on that.
-jeff
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Just adding a requirement to have a decent profile on the wiki could
help. The candidate can put there helpful information so the
nomination can be more a personal statement by the nominator, with
only the highlights and not a complete resume. The work then is
balanced between the nominator and the candidate. That ads a little
bit of extra work for candidates but reflects better the interest of
him/her to be a member, no?
On the other hand, knowing before the vote the support to the
candidate by other members is a valuable information, how to get it
*easily* but without adding too much overhead to the community is a
challenge. Maybe a mailing list is not the best tool for this,
thinking on something like the *thumbs-up* of social networks, reddit
or stack overflow, mmm
--
Jorge Sanz
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.osgeo.org">http://www.osgeo.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz</a>
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>