<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Steven’s original proposal had strong majority support — I believe the results were as follows:<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class="">+1 = 12</div><div class="">+0 = 1</div><div class="">-1 = 2</div><div class="">Not voted = 3</div></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">So that the group is not in a state of limbo — can that original vote be accepted with majority support so that there is a framework for moving forward and if required make amendments from here? Otherwise — I’m not sure anything effective can move forward at this point.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Dave</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Sep 30, 2016, at 8:45 AM, Cameron Shorter <<a href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com" class="">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type" class="">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" class=""><p class="">Steven, others,<br class="">
</p><p class="">The conference committee is ineffective if it can't make
efficient decisions. Usually, any decision is better than no
decision, and is certainly the case for this motion. I'm in favour
of Steven, as chair, using his best judgement to finalise this
vote and move forward to being effective again.</p><p class="">Steven, I trust your judgement, and you have my vote.</p><p class="">Warm regards, Cameron<br class="">
</p>
<br class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 30/09/2016 7:35 PM, Steven Feldman
wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5B652872-D905-4838-A5E2-D5B4AB10BB02@gmail.com" type="cite" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" class="">
I am combining Maria’s mail and Venka’s (copied below) and
responding to both
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Several people have expressed concern that a lot of
committee members have not voted on the recent amendment and
have suggested that if they do not vote in a further round of
voting on the amendment and/or the original motion they should
be obliged to stand down for the committee.
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">It has been suggested that not voting indicates a
lack of commitment. I disagree, we have a committee whose
expertise is in the delivery of FOSS4G events, particularly
the global events. I would not be surprised or concerned if
several of them are not interested in the procedural details
of what quorum we should require on the odd occasion that we
vote. As long as they commit their time and experience to
carefully considering the LoI’s and Proposals in the FOSS4G
selection process, asking penetrating and insightful questions
and then voting to select our recommendation to the board I am
grateful for their participation.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Not withstanding what I have just said, I do
believe that the committee size should be limited to 11 and
should have a defined retirement process as I proposed in the
original motion.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I don’t see the lack of votes for Maria’s
amendment as a dereliction of duty, I see it as a sign of
exhaustion with this seemingly never ending debate. The mail
trail now exceeds 120! After extensive discussion, the
original motion which incorporated the standard Committee
Guidelines on voting was voted for by a strong majority of the
committee (+1 = 12, +0 = 1, -1 = 2, no votes = 3 of which one
verbally supported the motion but did not place a formal
vote). We have now spent nearly 2 working weeks discussing
amendments and have voted on one (there are potentially 4
more amendments to discuss and vote on, one of which
potentially reverses the intention of the original motion by
seeking to increase rather than reduce the size of the
committee). In my opinion, this is not the reasonable pursuit
of consensus it is bordering on an abuse of process.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">The voting rules that were proposed in the
original motion are based on the Committee Guidelines which
are in use in several of our committees and PSCs. If these
guidelines represent a ‘benevolent dictatorship’ (what others
may describe as a do-ocracy) that is now considered
unacceptable, then it is for the Board to initiate a
discussion (and presumably a vote amongst the charter
membership) that changes these guidelines for all committees
not just for the Conference Committee.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">It is up to Venka and Maria if they wish to insist
on a further vote. If we are to vote again, we need to be
clear whether we are voting on the original motion or the
amended motion or a further amended motion which also includes
some or all of the further amendments (2-5) which have yet to
be fully discussed.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I recognise that as the proposer of the original
motion who has strong views on this topic, I may be struggling
to maintain the balance and objectivity necessary to act as
chair on this matter. If anyone feels that the committee would
be better served by me standing aside for the remainder of the
discussion and voting on this matter, please say so and I will
temporarily stand down. When the committee reaches a
conclusion on the motion and we have been through the cycle of
retirements and elections (presumably early 2017 after the
FOSS4G 2018 selection is completed), I suggest that the new
committee selects its chairman.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I will be going off line from the end of business
today until Wednesday to celebrate the Jewish New Year. If
there is to be further discussion or voting initiated I hope
that the vote extends until I am back online.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Shanah tovah u’metukah (may you have a good and
sweet year)</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; line-height: normal; border-spacing: 0px;">______<br class="">
Steven<br class="">
<br class="">
</span>
</div>
<br class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On 30 Sep 2016, at 07:43, Maria Antonia
Brovelli <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:maria.brovelli@polimi.it" class="">maria.brovelli@polimi.it</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8" class="">
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">
<div class="">Steven </div>
<div class="">I'm also confused and demoralised as
well. The main problem in my opinion is the
inactivity of this commission (it could be also of
other commissions, but I'm not part of other
commissions). I'm surprised about how the main
problem is to find an easy solution when the problem
is why 9 people didn't find the time (= interest) of
voting.</div>
<div class="">Even if volunteers and, in my opinion,
more as volunteers we have to be reliable people
committed with our community.</div>
<div class="">Unfortunately I'm not able to notice
that attitude in the last voting. </div>
<div class="">If I have to tell you the truth, I'm,
above all, sad and surprise that for the most of
people this is a normal situation at which we have
simply to put a patch.</div>
<div class="">Sorry for being so direct, obviously I'm
not thinking of you, who have been doing so much for
this Committee ( thanks again) or other people, but
the situation is really and definitely different
with respect of that I thought to find in an OSGeo
Committee.</div>
<div class="">Good day to everybody.</div>
<div class="">Maria </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div id="composer_signature" class="">
<div style="font-size:85%; color:#575757" class="">Inviato
dal mio dispositivo Samsung</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
-------- Messaggio originale --------<br class="">
Da: Steven Feldman <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:shfeldman@gmail.com" class="">shfeldman@gmail.com</a>>
<br class="">
Data: 30/09/2016 00:48 (GMT+01:00) <br class="">
A: Maria Antonia Brovelli <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:maria.brovelli@polimi.it" class="">maria.brovelli@polimi.it</a>>,
Conference Dev <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org" class="">conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a>>
<br class="">
Oggetto: Re: R: [OSGeo-Conf] [Board] Amended MOTION
(items 1-5): Conference Committee - Updating
Membership Policies and Process
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div style="direction:inherit" class="">Maria</div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class="">I am
confused. I think you mean that the amendment
did not pass? Are you withdrawing your veto of
the original motion (which had support from a
substantial majority of the committee)?</div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class="">What do
you mean by "<span style="" class="">Therefore
we will vote as in the past for the other
items."? What other items? The only voting
rules we had in the past were the Committee
Guidelines, which were incorporated into the
original motion. Can you clarify?</span></div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class=""><span style="" class=""><br class="">
</span></div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class=""><span style="" class="">Venka could you advise
whether your veto still stands following this
vote on Maria's amendment?</span></div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class="">This
example of our decision making process cannot be
appropriate for a voluntary community. Please
let's bring this to a conclusion</div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div style="direction:inherit" class=""><br class="">
</div>
Steven
<div style="direction:inherit" class=""><br class="">
</div>
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
On 29 Sep 2016, at 22:46, Maria Antonia Brovelli
<<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:maria.brovelli@polimi.it" class="">maria.brovelli@polimi.it</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" class="">
<div class="">Dear Steven</div>
<div class="">The motion didn't pass. </div>
<div class="">Therefore we will vote as in the
past for the other items.</div>
<div class="">Many thanks.</div>
<div class="">Best regards.</div>
<div class="">Maria </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div id="composer_signature" class="">
<div style="font-size:85%; color:#575757" class="">Inviato dal mio dispositivo Samsung</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Venka said:</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Dear All,<br class="">
<br class="">
Sorry if this mail sounds a little mixed-up as<br class="">
I am trying to answer multiple points raised<br class="">
after the voting status on the amended motion<br class="">
was declared.<br class="">
<br class="">
The way I look at the 25% quorum threshold, suggested by
Eli,<br class="">
is that it is close to the "benevolent dictatorship"<br class="">
decision model. One of our projects in incubation<br class="">
was asked to retire since the lead developer proposed<br class="">
to adopt such a model for the project PSC.<br class="">
<br class="">
Our Charter Member rules allow for retiring<br class="">
members who have not voted over a continuous period<br class="">
of two years. Since charter members vote only for<br class="">
the board election, this means that they are retired<br class="">
if they do not cast their one vote (for Board election)<br class="">
in consecutive years.<br class="">
<br class="">
Considering the above, I suggest that the Amended Motion<br class="">
for quorum be tabled for one last time with a specific<br class="">
indication that members who have not voted for<br class="">
the motion in two (or three) consecutive rounds of voting<br class="">
will be considered as retired and the votes by the<br class="">
members who participate in the third round of voting<br class="">
would be considered valid.<br class="">
<br class="">
If we still have only 7 members voting for the third round<br class="">
of voting, the majority votes among the 7 could be<br class="">
used if the motion has passed or not.<br class="">
<br class="">
Regarding the query from Steve whether some of us would<br class="">
like reconsider our votes in the initial round of voting,<br class="">
I think, that since the voting results were already<br class="">
declared, it would be better to decide with the third<br class="">
and final round of voting.<br class="">
<br class="">
Best<br class="">
<br class="">
Venka</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br class="">
<pre wrap="" class="">_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">Conference_dev mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org" class="">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a><br class="">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>