[OSGeo-Discuss] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter members
tech_dev at wildintellect.com
Mon Jun 23 11:46:10 PDT 2014
On 06/23/2014 11:01 AM, Dimitris Kotzinos wrote:
> Dear Cameron,
> thanks for the reply and the comments to my previous e-mail. It also
> gave me a chance to revisit the rules around the charter members.
> I was expecting this issue to be further discussed within the community
> and i am a bit disappointed with the evolution of the discussion, given
> the fact that the board will make a decision shortly.
> I am happy that you agree with me in most of the cases; I should also
> point out that my comments aim at improving the voting process this year
> (why wait for the next) unless this year's decision does not accept any
> A few more comments:
> -- Voting of charter members: I agree that in the rules is stated that
> the Charter Members are voting for new Charter Members and the board.
> Then maybe we should consider the members to vote (I think that this can
> be considered based on the bylaws)?
> If we agree with the need to validate this kind of decisions from a
> larger body, then a solution can be found.
> -- For the proposed changes and in the request for data to validate
> them; I cannot understand the comment that anyone who disagrees should
> bring up data that validate the current status. Usually the one who
> proposes changes should bring along some data to prove that the changes
> are needed and are in the proper direction. But for me there is no need
> since the last two years, whoever applied for Charter Member status was
> accepted. So I cannot see who was rejected.
> So I still do not see where the need for such changes comes from and
> what exactly we expect to improve with this.
One only needs to look at the nomination lists in the years where we did
not accept all nominations to find people who were not accepted but are
well known contributors to the community. We've avoided the conversation
for a few years by accepting all the nominations, but only because the
number of them was not too high.
Comparing to http://www.osgeo.org/charter_members is somewhat
challenging (seems to be in no particular order, perhaps random order on
More information about the Discuss