[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo Governance

[Jorge Gustavo Rocha]

Hi,

+1 on the current decision model. If the discussions are made in an open 
fashion, as being done, everyone as the possibility to express the 
opinion and bring the new issues to the discussion. Maybe we need more 
people paying attention about what is going on, but we don't need 
another level on the hierarchy.

Regards,

Jorge

Em 27-05-2012 02:06, Stephen Woodbridge escreveu:
> Hi Arnulf and the whole OSGeo Board,
>
> +1 as a vote of confidence in the board and in this decision by them.
> Please keep things moving and if you feel things need a broader
> discussion I'm sure you will let us know. I do think notices of
> decisions like your email are very helpful to keep us up to date with
> what decisions are getting made, and making it clear, like you did, that
> they are a "notice to inform" OR a "request for comment" should resolve
> an confusion by potential readers.
>
> Thank you for the update.
>
> Best regards to all,
> -Steve
>
> On 5/26/2012 2:38 PM, Arnulf Christl (OSGeo) wrote:
>> Dear Members of OSGeo,
>> we have an important issue on governance coming up again and again. It
>> suggests that OSGeo Board decisions should be complemented by votes from
>> the Charter Members when "important" and "strategic" decisions have to
>> be taken. Something like this:
>>
>> [snip]
>>>> For such important decisions, I think that it would maybe
>>>> worth making Charter members vote too, just like to get an
>>>> major orientation decided by 120 people instead of only 8.
>> [snip]
>>
>> Initially this sounded like a good idea to me so we discussed this in
>> Denver and then again in Seattle at the last f2f board meetings plus on
>> the list and during regular IRC board meetings. We have come to a
>> different conclusion and want to explain why and ask for comments.
>>
>> Introducing another level of voting introduces a hierarchy to OSGeo
>> which we have so far avoided and which we should - in my personal
>> opinion - continue to avoid. We have committees for all important areas
>> of work. If we lack a committee any member can suggest to form it. Most
>> decisions are taking in the committees and they are pretty open to
>> everything. Some committees function better, some not so - but this is
>> entirely up to the regular members who make up the committees.
>>
>> We have a functioning board of directors for some of the day to day
>> operations and to approve or reject decisions taken by committees. This
>> is a health check and makes sure we do not go astray. The board is
>> recruited and elected by trusted Charter Members. This is their role and
>> it is their only role. There is not need for another role at this level.
>> If any regular member wants to become active, go for it. Same for ex
>> board members. Whenever they think the current board is wrong they can
>> say so. And they can suggest how to do it better, just like any regular
>> member.
>>
>> Whenever a committee does not function but a decision has to be taken
>> the board steps up and takes over. This is one reason why we have the
>> board, to keep rolling. All other decisions, especially strategic and
>> important ones are taken by regular members who do things.
>>
>> By introducing a new level of decisions - for example the Charter
>> Members - we gain nothing. Instead we introduce an artificial hierarchy
>> which does not help anybody. Instead it will discourage regular members
>> to speak up and become active. And it is anti do-ocratic because it is
>> easy to say yes or no to a motion but so much harder to formulate that
>> motion in the first place. We need people who creatively bring up new
>> things and not decide over what others have done.
>>
>> Thank you for your attention,
>> Arnulf
>>
>> PS:
>> Apart form this only very few Charter Members actually speak up at all -
>> a big thank you to those who do! Running a Charter and Board election is
>> always a major pain and takes weeks to complete. It is impractical to do
>> this more than once a year.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss