[Board] Added "OSGeo Charter Responsibilities"

[Daniel Morissette]

On 14-08-18 1:41 PM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>
> - As CRO, for the records, and hoping that those numbers are
> meaningful and help to improve the criteria, let me share some basic
> statistics regarding support, that is: yes/(yes+no+abs):
>
> -- Maximum: 84%
> -- Minimum: 39%
> -- Average: 56%
> -- Number of candidates with more than 51%: 45 of 64
>


Thank you Jorge for sharing those numbers. For one, they show that all 
nominees got a significant level of support (39% or more), so we should 
not be worried about the result of the 2014 election even if the process 
could still be improved for future years. That's very reassuring.

Just thinking out loud, one thing that puzzles me, is the 84% maximum. 
I'm not saying there is a problem with it or questioning the results at 
all, just making an observation that even the best and most well known 
nominees got at least 16% of no/abstain votes. This is surprising me 
since a few of the nominees had a long list of credentials and/or were 
supported by well known members of the community, and even at that, 
still got 16% abstain/no votes. Nothing wrong with it, but I wonder what 
that means for the way charter members vote, and how that information 
could be used in refining the process. i.e. it's quite likely that 
requiring 51% yes for a new charter member may be too high for the less 
known nominees who are mostly active at the local level when the best 
nominees who were active at the international level for several years 
only got 84%.

Once again, I'm just sharing an observation, and not trying to question 
anything or launch a new debate.

-- 
Daniel Morissette
T: +1 418-696-5056 #201
http://www.mapgears.com/
Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000