[Board] Current election cycle discussion

Sat Oct 21 12:09:11 PDT 2017

I agree with a) as well, I think that at this point the board should stay out of the election process.

Helena

> On Oct 21, 2017, at 3:03 PM, Michael Smith <michael.smith.erdc at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I would also agree with a.
> 
> Mike 
> 
> From: Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com <mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>>
> Date: Saturday, October 21, 2017 at 2:51 PM
> To: Angelos Tzotsos <gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com <mailto:gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com>>, Michael Smith <michael.smith.erdc at gmail.com <mailto:michael.smith.erdc at gmail.com>>, "board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:board at lists.osgeo.org>" <board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:board at lists.osgeo.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Board] Current election cycle discussion
> 
>> I would prefer (a) because you know we should not need to express our trust again :)
>> 
>> I understand though that this election cycle has raised some uncertainty and I would rather issue a statement of support (b) than see that cycle continue. 
>> 
>> I was thinking hard on (c) and then noticed it is not our responsibility. We can hold ourself open to offering assistance of asked, and trust CRO to ask for appropriate assistance if needful. I would feel more comfortable if an already recognized officer was provided for assistance considering director and officer liability etc... 
>> 
>> Thanks everyone for being professional on this one (by which I mean careful, considerate, respectful). 
>> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 11:00 AM Angelos Tzotsos <gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com <mailto:gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> Perhaps we should schedule a meeting within 24h to discuss election issues raised in the mailing lists, and then make a public announcement? Or just hear from our CRO and offer assistance.
>>> Personally, I volunteer to help, since I am not involved in the elections as a candidate.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Angelos
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10/21/2017 08:47 PM, Michael Smith wrote:
>>>> B publicly, C privately.
>>>> 
>>>> I think the CRO has performed amazingly and deserves all our support. To me,
>>>> everything has been handled transparently and above board.
>>>> 
>>>> Mike
>>>> 
>>>> Michael Smith
>>>> OSGeo Foundation Treasurer
>>>> Treasurer at osgeo.org <mailto:Treasurer at osgeo.org>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From:  Board <board-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> <mailto:board-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of Jody Garnett
>>>> <jody.garnett at gmail.com> <mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>
>>>> Date:  Saturday, October 21, 2017 at 1:38 PM
>>>> To:  "board at lists.osgeo.org" <mailto:board at lists.osgeo.org> <board at lists.osgeo.org> <mailto:board at lists.osgeo.org>
>>>> Subject:  [Board] Current election cycle discussion
>>>> 
>>>>> Early I spoke up when I was concerned our delay on recognizing new members
>>>>> would disrupt the ongoing election. This was explicitly the responsibility of
>>>>> the board and I was careful to ask the CRO and follow their lead.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I would like to ask the board if we should extend any kind of support to our
>>>>> CRO this week. This election has had hit a number of bumps on the road and I
>>>>> feel bad that so much is being asked if our CRO.
>>>>> 
>>>>> A) Do nothing, understanding that our CRO is handling things well and has our
>>>>> trust (this is of course assumed)
>>>>> 
>>>>> B) Explicitly state to reaffirm for our members that the CRO is doing a
>>>>> difficult job and has our trust.
>>>>> 
>>>>> C) Ask if the CRO wishes any assistance, even if our capacity is reduced.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is not that fun a discussion, and only half our board is realistically
>>>>> available.  We have also accepted the CRO¹s comittment and balance our respect
>>>>> for their integrity and our concern for this election placing more
>>>>> responsibility and attention on their role then usual.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I thought it would be better to start this email thread here, rather than
>>>>> subject the CRO and board members to another round of questions on discuss. I
>>>>> suspect some of the questions arise from a misunderstanding of the influence
>>>>> that board has, especially in the case of elections which very carefully a
>>>>> hands off affair.
>>>>> --
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jody Garnett
>>>>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
>>>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Board mailing list
>>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
>>> --
>>> Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
>>> Charter Member
>>> Open Source Geospatial Foundation
>>> http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos <http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos>
>> -- 
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

Helena Mitasova
Professor at the Department of Marine, 
Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
and Center for Geospatial Analytics
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
hmitaso at ncsu.edu
http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html <http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html>

"All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which are sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.” 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20171021/f7a8ccba/attachment.htm>