[OSGeo-Discuss] "Hostile Takeover" -- what do we mean by this?

[Jody Garnett]

I do not think we need to get the wording perfect, we have have multiple
bullet points to cover this requirement.

I encourage everyone to look at the larger page, some of this is covered
under guidence for candidate selection.

--
Jody Garnett

On 30 August 2017 at 08:54, Kevin Smith <smithkm at draconic.ca> wrote:

> Maybe something like "maintain the organization's representation of the
> diverse interests in the community"?
>
> It's a bit clunky but I think it works.
>
>
> On 2017-08-30 07:33 AM, Margherita Di Leo wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> If I may still chime in, I don't think this keeps the meaning of what was
> originally intended, I would add diversity to integrity. In an extreme
> example, if you consider the risk of green aliens taking over osgeo, those
> aliens may have integrity and still if they are too many, they would
> naturally start to represent the interest of their planet. Diversity is
> IMHO what would keep the balance.
>
> My 0.02€
>
> Il giorno mer 30 ago 2017 alle 06:35 Sara Safavi <sara at sarasafavi.com> ha
> scritto:
>
>> Coming back to this discussion; thank you all who chimed in with more
>> information.
>>
>> With the words of wisdom from Frank, Jody, and others -- is it fair to
>> say that Charter Members have the responsibility of voting, as well as
>> "preserving the integrity of the OSGeo Foundation"? That seems a less,
>> well, hostile, way to express the main idea that seems to have come out of
>> this discussion.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Sara Safavi <sara at sarasafavi.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi discuss,
>>>
>>> In the notification emails from CRO to new charter member nominees, the
>>> following is included (emphasis mine):
>>>
>>> *"(Charter Members) have the following responsibilities: (1) annually
>>> vote for OSGeo Board Members; (2) annually vote for new OSGeo Charter
>>> Members and (3) be aware of and protect against a hostile takeover of
>>> OSGeo."*
>>>
>>> I have had more than one nominee of mine contact me asking what exactly
>>> this means. I agree with their concerns: this is strange language to use,
>>> is not reflected in our bylaws, and frankly does not fit the image I
>>> presented when I first contacted them asking if they would accept a
>>> nomination.
>>>
>>> It may be a language barrier or simply a misunderstanding, but can we
>>> clarify what is meant by using this kind of verbiage, and consider a
>>> re-wording?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sara
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> --
> Margherita Di Leo
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing listDiscuss at lists.osgeo.orghttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
> --
> Kevin Michael Smith<smithkm at draconic.ca> <smithkm at draconic.ca>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170830/4988cc1f/attachment.html>