<div dir="ltr">+1<div>Ravi Kumar</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 5:29 AM, Cameron Shorter <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com" target="_blank">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
OSGeo board,<br>
As an OSGeo Charter member, I request that the following motion (see
below) not be passed without first discussing publicly on the OSGeo
Discuss email list.<br>
<br>
The current process for joining OSGeo Charter Membership [2] was
specifically refined to be more inclusive than before, in order to
make it easy for all passionate people within the OSGeo community to
join, while aiming to protect against the now relatively unlikely
possibility of a hostile takeover.<br>
<br>
Based on the proposal below, 11 out of 64 of last years successful
nominations would be rejected under the proposed new rules. I
suggest this is not in OSGeo's interests.<br>
<br>
It is possible that some of these 11 people are not very involved in
OSGeo, and maybe haven't contributed much since being nominated, but
is that a bad thing? Have any of these 11 people been actively
detrimental to OSGeo while being an OSGeo Charter member? Note, the
only official duty of a charter member is to vote for the board.
However, being recognised as a charter member is useful for many of
our members looking to gain OSGeo credibility, such as when
presenting at conferences.<br>
<br>
If we are more inclusive, and add 10 new non-active/non-disruptive
OSGeo Charter members, then I'd argue that it is worth it for the 1
passionate Charter member we also gain.<br>
<br>
I remember a quote from Jeff which rang true with me, and which I
think is applicable here:<br>
<i><br>
</i><i>"I once heard an interview with a legendary lead singer of a
band, who said his goal each concert was to make the kid sitting
in the very back row to feel like he's as much a part of the
concert as the kid sitting in the front row, and this is exactly
how I focus my community work for OSGeo."</i><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-August/013498.html" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-August/013498.html</a><br>
<br>
Warm regards, Cameron Shorter<br>
<br>
On 20/06/2015 5:29 am, Vasile Craciunescu wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Dear
all,
<br>
<br>
Please also vote for motion below.
<br>
<br>
5) For the new charter members elections, change the threshold of
required YES votes of charter members from 5% to 50%. See Jeff's
e-mail [1] for detailed explanations and the rationale of this
change. If needed, also check the Membership Process [2].
<br>
<br>
My vote is +1.
<br>
<br>
Best,
<br>
Vasile
<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2015-May/012863.html" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2015-May/012863.html</a>
<br>
[2] <a href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process" target="_blank">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process</a>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div>On 26/05/2015 2:18 am, Jeff McKenna
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">3. Decide on 2015 Selection Process <br>
----------------------------------- <br>
<br>
To refresh everyone's memory, last year we (Board) modified the
selection process[3] for Charter members; but in my opinion we
made a mistake with the voting change of "Each candidate with more
YES votes than NO votes, and greater than 5% of voting charter
members voting YES for them, will be included as new charter
members." <br>
<br>
What I saw was, for the first time in OSGeo history, strategic
nominations by certain projects, for relatively unknown community
members; the result was that all 64 nominations were accepted as
Charter members. <br>
<br>
For 2015, I am proposing we make 1 change, instead of the 5%
acceptance, change that to 50% or greater voting YES. Such as: <br>
<br>
*** <br>
Each candidate with more YES votes than NO votes, and greater than
or equal to 50% of voting charter members voting YES for them,
will be included as new charter members. <br>
*** <br>
<br>
I have checked the 2014 results again, and with those new 50%
rules, we would have accepted 45 nominations versus all 64
nominations. I believe this is much better. <br>
<br>
But of course this needs to be decided by the Board and
community. I am merely kicking off the process <span title=":)"></span> So please speak your
mind, or edit the 2015 Elections wiki directly. <br>
<br>
Yours, <br>
<br>
-jeff
</blockquote><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<pre 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 href="http://www.lisasoft.com" target="_blank">www.lisasoft.com</a>, F +61 2 9009 5099</pre>
</font></span></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Board mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>