[Board] Current election cycle discussion

[Jody Garnett]

Thanks Venka, that agrees with my own understanding and thoughts.

--
Jody Garnett

On 21 October 2017 at 20:27, Venkatesh Raghavan <
raghavan at media.osaka-cu.ac.jp> wrote:

> Comments are inline.
>
> On 10/22/2017 12:12 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>
> Thanks everyone:
>
>    - Maria Brovelli: A
>    - Vasile Craciunescu: n/a
>    - Jody Garnett: A
>    - Anita Graser: -
>    - Helena Mitasova: A
>    - Venkatesh Raghavan: A
>    - Sanghee Shin: A
>    - Michael Smith: B publicly, C privately, A agree
>    - Angelos Tzotsos: consider meeting with 24th hours or C
>
> I also note that Maxi has made a request for the board take responsibility
> and not accept Jeff's withdrawal as a candidate. Venka your email to
> discuss indicated support for this idea, can you elaborate on your thinking?
>
>
> It is not for the board to accept or not accept.
> It is for the CRO to accept or not accept, I think.
> The CRO can, perhaps announce that candidates
> are not allowed to withdraw mid-way of the election
> process.
>
> Board can take responsibility to request the CRO to
> make an announcement that candidates cannot withdraw
> mid-way of election.
>
> How to handle matter related to Jeff's can be taken up by the
> new board after the election process in over.
>
> Venka
>
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 21 October 2017 at 10:38, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> 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 CRO’s 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 listBoard at lists.osgeo.orghttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20171021/8d022970/attachment.htm>