[Board] Potential inactive members - action requested

[Frank Warmerdam]

Michael,

I'm most comfortable with option (2).

Best regards,
Frank


On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Michael Gerlek <mpg at flaxen.com> wrote:

> Boarders:
>
> It is our policy [citation needed] that members who have not voted in the
> past two elections are eligible for removal as "inactive". This is the
> first time we are finally able to act on this policy, due to skipped
> elections and such.
>
> The past two elections were the 2013 Board vote and the 2012 Board vote.
> (The 2013 Charter vote was not not held.) These members did not vote in
> those two elections are are therefore candidates for removal:
>
> Bob Basque
> Chris Holmes
>
> César Medina
>
> Eric Lemoine
>
> G.Hanumantha Rao
>
> Gary Sherman
>
> Geoff Zeiss
>
> Hardeep S. Rai
>
> Haris Kurtagic
>
> Helton Uchoa
>
> Jackie Ng
>
> James MacGill
>
> Jan-Oliver Wagner
>
> Jean-Roc Morreale
>
> Jo Walsh
>
> John Graham
>
> Jorge Gustavo Rocha
>
> Justin Bronn
>
> Lorenzo Becchi
>
> Luis W. Sevilla
>
> Mark Cave-Ayland
>
> Martin Davis
>
> Paolo Cavallini
>
> Rafael Medeiros Sperb
>
> Rich Steele
>
> Rob Atkinson
>
> Schuyler D. Erle
>
> Tim Sutton
>
> Wolf Bergenheim
>
>
> Note that removal due to inactivity should not be considered a "hostile"
> act nor should I reflect poorly on the individual removed. Rather, this
> process is simply intended to keep the set of charter members robust and
> current. We recognize that people's careers and interests change over time.
>
>
> As this is the first time we're taking this action, and as I'm no longer
> technically on the board, I'm going to ask for the board's recommendation
> on how to proceed. Options are:
>
>
> (1)  do nothing – keep these members on the active list
>
> (2)  send them emails asking them if they want to be removed or if they
> want to stay on (response required within 7 days, else default removal)
>
> (3)  remove them, and send a mail indicating they have been removed due to
> inactivity
>
> (4)  remove them, without attempt at notification
>
> (5)  do nothing for now – board to discuss matter at future meeting
>
> Because it is possible these people were missed for administrative reasons
> (incorrect email addresses, incorrect vote tabulations) I suggest option 2.
>
>
> The board with  to deal with this informally by email right now, or wait
> and take a formal vote at the next meeting.
>
> I serve at the pleasure of the Board, and am happy to act on the above as
> however the Board in their collective wisdom sees fit to direct me.
>
> -mpg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>



-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Software Developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20130916/1417a54f/attachment.htm>