[Board] Potential inactive members - action requested

[Bart van den Eijnden]

I also vote for option 2)

Best regards,
Bart

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 16, 2013, at 9:03 PM, Frank Warmerdam <warmerdam at pobox.com> wrote:

> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20130916/44c1e76c/attachment.htm>