[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo Governance

[Ravi Kumar]

 "important" and "strategic" decisions:

I have been emailing to use the Ex Directors and Charter members whenever  '"important" and "strategic" decisions', are in the offing. 
This may not be to create another level by taking their votes; I am happy the way the OSGeo is steered.
Ravi Kumar


________________________________
 From: Puneet Kishor <punk.kish at gmail.com>
To: arnulf at osgeo.org 
Cc: OSGeo Discussions <discuss at lists.osgeo.org> 
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2012 12:23 AM
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo Governance
 

On May 26, 2012, at 1:38 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.
> ..


I don't know if you are asking for input from the charter members, but if you are, I concur with your conclusion. I trust the board to make the right decision on my behalf, and if and when I don't, I will do my little bit to choose a different board.

Keep up the hard work.


--
Puneet Kishor http://punkish.org
science http://earth-base.org
advocacy http://creativecommons.org_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20120528/6fc9e6fa/attachment-0002.html>