[OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] Elections 2017 from the CRO point of view

Massimiliano Cannata massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
Wed Oct 25 14:23:54 PDT 2017

Vasile, Thanks.

On the election, I think fair play should not be an option in our
community. I hope we're not loosing respect and ethics... getting closer to

I hope 2018 will be the OSGeo year of "open values" and "reach in" to
remember our roots.


Il 25 ott 2017 11:06 PM, "María Arias de Reyna" <delawen+osgeo at gmail.com>
ha scritto:

> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Anita Graser <anitagraser at gmx.at> wrote:
>> Thank you for your summary and assessment of the situation, Vasile!
>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 9:57 PM, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I am not sure I have collected my own thoughts, in the interests of
>>> meeting your request I would like to ask if the current board members are
>>> available for 14:00 UTC tomorrow.
>> ​I can't guarantee that I'll be able to make it, but here are my thoughts:
>> 1) +1 Vasile's recommendation "to create a clear rule stating that an
>> accepted nomination cannot be withdraw after the start of the voting
>> period", and therefore
>> 2) +1 the recommendation "not to admit the [withdrawal] request from Jef"
>> 3) +1 "not to start new elections" for the reasons summarized by Vasile
> Although it is true that this hasn't been very peaceful elections, I am
> against of restarting the elections. If this is a democracy, let us decide
> if we want to vote or not for someone. And if after the elections that
> person feels that there is too much pressure and cannot stand it, then let
> that person resign. And if we make a mistake and vote for someone who is a
> bad choice, well, we will learn and not vote for that person again, right?
> That's the beauty (and the beast) of the democracy. Mistakes can be made,
> but they are not forever.
> And this goes also for all the people who did campaign aggresively (public
> and privately) against one of the candidates. It is good to ask about
> things that worry you and to expose what you think it is a failure. But if
> there is nothing on the rules that prevents that person to be elected, as
> it was the case (maybe because of a loophole, but rules didn't explicitly
> say he couldn't be elected), then that's it. There is no need to push that
> to the personal level.
> Thanks a lot Vasile for the work done. I have no doubt you did the best on
> this case. And I hope the new board can work on your suggestions, I think
> they are the right path to go. And reinforce the rules to cover extreme
> cases.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171025/c2466052/attachment.html>

More information about the Discuss mailing list