[OSGeo-Conf] Poll: Change FOSS4G structure to have some continuity of organization and management

[Eli Adam]

Hi Maxi and all,


On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 7:15 AM Massimiliano Cannata <
massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch> wrote:

> Dear conference community,
> why is the community left out from this decision / discussion?
>

All are free to discuss and have been for years.


>
> The FOSS4G conference is a property of OSGeo, and therefore of the
> community as a whole.
> The conference committee has not been elected so cannot decide in
> representation of the community.
>

The Conference Committee was created by the Board (which is elected) and
operates under authority delegated by the Board.  The Board is free to
change or revoke that authority and to even dissolve the committee.  This
is more or less how all OSGeo committees and projects operate.


>
> As an OPEN community I strongly believe that all the charter members (at
> least) should have a word or vote on such an important decision.
>

We don't vote on which features get developed on our favorite projects or
which pull requests get accepted.  Projects have operating procedures for
those matters and committees operate much the same way.  If you want to
change this structure, it would probably start at the Board.

Best regards, Eli


>
> I hope this message is not ignored..
>
> Maxi
>
>
>
> Il giorno gio 3 feb 2022 alle ore 15:04 Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us>
> ha scritto:
>
>> Hi all (particularly voting committee members),
>>
>> The current FOSS4G structure has a new LOC every year starting more or
>> less from scratch (some things like mailing lists and seed money are passed
>> on).  Over the years, many people have commented on the load of work this
>> creates for the LOC, the general inefficiency, the risk, and the burnout.
>>
>> If you consider yourself a voting member of the committee (
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Conference_Committee#Current_Members),
>> please indicate your preference on this.
>>
>> This is an informal poll to see if the conference committee wants to:
>> 1. Keep it the way it is and not change anything
>> 2. Change the FOSS4G organizing structure to something else (discussion
>> of what we change it to can come later if people want to pursue this).
>>
>> As I've expressed several times, I prefer option 2, changing the FOSS4G
>> organizing structure.
>>
>> Thanks for your time and participation.
>>
>> Best regards, Eli
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>
>
> --
> *Massimiliano Cannata*
>
> Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica
>
> Responsabile settore Geomatica
>
>
> *Istituto scienze della Terra*
>
> Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design
>
> Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana
>
> Campus Mendrisio, Via Flora Ruchat-Roncati 15
>
> CH – 6850 Mendrisio
>
> Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14
>
> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09
>
> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
>
> *www.supsi.ch/ist <http://www.supsi.ch/ist>*
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20220203/0fd46300/attachment.html>