[Board] vice president discussion

Tue Oct 25 13:21:34 PDT 2016

Dirk, others,

I'd suggest there might be a 3rd reason for selecting a new president or 
vice-president. It might just be that a new person happens to be more 
enthusiastic, have some more time, be more practical, be better known, 
... It doesn't always mean a person will be better at the role.

I suggest that the most successful open source communities work as a 
bottom-up organisation, rather than top-down. Successful Open Source 
projects are usually based on the principles of Do-ocracy, Merit-ocracy 
and rough consensus. Anyone and everyone is encouraged to contribute on 
their own terms, and any official officer is more a facilitator than a 
decision maker. We limit ourselves as a community of we over-emphasise 
the importance of specific roles.

So yes, we should be mindful of people's feelings, but we should also 
make the space for anyone to contribute to whatever level they wish, 
rather than focusing on specific positions of power.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 25/10/2016 8:11 PM, Dirk Frigne wrote:
> Venka,
> Jody,
>
> Thank you for the clarification.
> I think no matter what decision the board takes, it is good to take into
> account that people 'invest' in their role and continuity gives the
> opportunity to get a better result /investment for that role.
>
> imho their can be 2 reasons for the board to change an officer:
>
> 1. the officer is resigning, and I think we always should accept that.
> In that case it is the responsibility of the board to find another
> voluntair.
>
> 2. the board is not satisfied with the way the officer is doing his Job
> for any reason.
> In that case I think the board should discuss this with the officer and
> try to find an elegant way to proceed.
>
> If we respect these rules I think we can help OSGeo grow further in a
> good way.
>
> just my 2c.
>
> Dirk
>
>
>
> On 25/10/2016 04:03, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:
>> Dear Dirk and Board,
>>
>> I am sorry for the confusion inadvertently caused due to
>> insufficient understanding and recollection of the earlier
>> board decision on my part.
>>
>> I was under the impression that the board decision at f2f in Jan 2016
>> was for having term of present President and Vice President same as
>> the tenure they will be serving on the board. As per the notes that Jody
>> has quoted below, my understanding was incorrect and the board needed to
>> select our President and Vice Presidents at our last meeting held on
>> 20 Oct. 2016.
>>
>> The selection needs to be made urgently as there are several matters
>> to be taken up by our President and Vice-President. I suggest that
>> we take this up at our next board meeting scheduled for  3 November
>> 2016.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Venka
>>
>> P.S. I have also responded to Dirk's mail on related topic privately, as
>> per his request.
>>
>> On 2016/10/25 9:36, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>> Dirk I was able to get some answers by digging into notes for
>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Face_to_Face_Meeting_2016
>>>
>>> *President and Vice President Election*
>>>
>>>
>>>     - *HM nominated VR as president*
>>>        - *VR accepted nomination*
>>>        - *All in favour*
>>>        - *VR elected as OSGeo President*
>>>        - *HM and DF nominated as Vice President*
>>>        - *All in favour*
>>>        - *Term of this President/VP:Until the next board initial meeting
>>>        after new board election.*
>>>        - *DF(Suggestion): need to change board members 2 yrs term to 3 yrs.
>>>        This is a part of strategic plan of OSGeo.(JG)*
>>>
>>> It looks like the term for the President and Vice Presidents has elapsed,
>>> and this meeting on Oct 20th was the intended time to choose new
>>> officers.... and since I was away those present pushed this conversation
>>> off to an email discussion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>> On 24 October 2016 at 17:33, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> aside: taking this into a seperate thread, since it is a change of topic.
>>>>
>>>> Looking into this Dirk, sorry I was working and could not attend the
>>>> meeting:
>>>>
>>>> *14:26:06 venka: Agenda 6: Selecting OSGeo Vice-President*
>>>> *14:26:55 helena_: it would be good to have somebody with industry
>>>> contacts for the second vice-president*
>>>> *14:26:56 vcraciunescu: this should also be postponed for a meeting when
>>>> all board members will attend*
>>>> *14:27:06 kalxas: vcraciunescu, +1*
>>>> *14:27:09 maria: +1*
>>>> *14:27:11 helena_: yes, I think it would be good to have Jody*
>>>> *14:27:16 venka: I suggest we start a thread on loomio and select our new
>>>> VP*
>>>>
>>>> Checking Loomio there is indeed a discussion / motion
>>>>
>>>> *https://www.loomio.org/d/jWiY2zLA/vice-president
>>>> <https://www.loomio.org/d/jWiY2zLA/vice-president>*
>>>>
>>>> So yeah I confess myself confused on this one, we have no requirement for
>>>> our officers to be board members - and I feel you are fulfilling your role
>>>> very well (and had some activities scheduled as our vice-president that I
>>>> would hate to interrupt).
>>>>
>>>> Let us assume that this was an assumption each vice-president had to be a
>>>> board member; rather than any reflection on your capabilities or commitment.
>>>>
>>>> While our organization does not have a director we tend to lean on the
>>>> office of president to pick up activities. Backing Venka up with two
>>>> vice-presidents is one way of picking up the strain (since we would like
>>>> Venka to remain cheerful).
>>>> --
>>>> Jody Garnett
>>>>
>>>> On 24 October 2016 at 00:03, Dirk Frigne <dirk.frigne at geosparc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Venka,
>>>>>
>>>>> I see on the committees page that my Offices role as Vice president is
>>>>> erased, and today I see on loomino a nomination for a new Vice President.
>>>>> I didn't see a motion in the board to dismiss me as an OSGeo Officer.
>>>>> If you did, and of course the board has the right to do this, it is
>>>>> polite to let me know. Maybe in advance if possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> In an organisation where these positions are paid, this is obligated. I
>>>>> think it hows at least some respect when the position was executed
>>>>> voluntarly to act in the same way.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can I also knwo (in private please) the reason why I was dismissed from
>>>>> my function?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>>
>>>>> Dirk Frigne
>>>>> Vice president OSGeo
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>

-- 
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254