[OSGeo-Discuss] "Hostile Takeover" -- what do we mean by this?

[Kevin Smith]

Maybe something like "maintain the organization's representation of the
diverse interests in the community"?

It's a bit clunky but I think it works.

On 2017-08-30 07:33 AM, Margherita Di Leo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If I may still chime in, I don't think this keeps the meaning of what
> was originally intended, I would add diversity to integrity. In an
> extreme example, if you consider the risk of green aliens taking over
> osgeo, those aliens may have integrity and still if they are too many,
> they would naturally start to represent the interest of their planet.
> Diversity is IMHO what would keep the balance.
>
> My 0.02€
>
> Il giorno mer 30 ago 2017 alle 06:35 Sara Safavi <sara at sarasafavi.com
> <mailto:sara at sarasafavi.com>> ha scritto:
>
>     Coming back to this discussion; thank you all who chimed in with
>     more information.
>
>     With the words of wisdom from Frank, Jody, and others -- is it
>     fair to say that Charter Members have the responsibility of
>     voting, as well as "preserving the integrity of the OSGeo
>     Foundation"? That seems a less, well, hostile, way to express the
>     main idea that seems to have come out of this discussion.
>
>
>     On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Sara Safavi <sara at sarasafavi.com
>     <mailto:sara at sarasafavi.com>> wrote:
>
>         Hi discuss,
>
>         In the notification emails from CRO to new charter member
>         nominees, the following is included (emphasis mine):
>         /
>         /
>         /"(Charter Members) have the following responsibilities: (1)
>         annually vote for OSGeo Board Members; (2) annually vote for
>         new OSGeo Charter Members and (3) *be aware of and protect
>         against a hostile takeover of OSGeo.*"/
>
>         I have had more than one nominee of mine contact me asking
>         what exactly this means. I agree with their concerns: this is
>         strange language to use, is not reflected in our bylaws, and
>         frankly does not fit the image I presented when I first
>         contacted them asking if they would accept a nomination.
>
>         It may be a language barrier or simply a misunderstanding, but
>         can we clarify what is meant by using this kind of verbiage,
>         and consider a re-wording? 
>
>         Thanks,
>         Sara
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Discuss mailing list
>     Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>     https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> -- 
> Margherita Di Leo
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


-- 
Kevin Michael Smith
<smithkm at draconic.ca>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170830/34c7b67d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 484 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170830/34c7b67d/attachment.sig>