[OSGeo Oceania] membership - elections - AGM

[Edoardo Neerhut]

Hi all,

Thanks for moving the discussion forward on this important topic.

*Membership criteria*
Regarding the membership base and how one qualifies, I broadly agree that
we need a system that encourages active participation. My only concern is
around the idea of "positive attributes". The term itself seems a bit
ambiguous and even the selection criteria outlined in the linked OSGeo wiki
seem a bit too vague for my liking. I think a system like this is
vulnerable to manipulation and not as merit based as we would like.

OSMF is at the other end of the spectrum with a membership fee but no
responsibilities.

As we are in the early days of our community, I think we would benefit
greatly from having a more open membership criteria, but with clear
obligations once a member, even if this was *simply voting each year*. My
worry that a more selective criteria with "positive attributes" might
discourage new people from joining and limit future leadership potential.

*Timing of the election*
Similarly, I agree with John and Cameron that an AGM at the conference
followed by an election shortly would allow new people to step up and do so
after due consideration. The date of the election should be fixed well in
advance so that people consider it seriously at the AGM and conference and
initiate any discussions they may want to have regarding the
responsibilities of membership and directorship.

Also:

   - As John mentioned, having the election during the conference unfairly
   disadvantages those unable to attend.
   - Elections can be both a positive and negative event depending on how
   they play out. We should reduce the risk of any negative fallout by
   separating the two events.

I'll need to put more thought into the actual running of the election. It
might be useful to have someone from OSMF or OSGeo join one of our board
meetings and shed light on how they run theirs.

Cheers,

Ed


On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 at 06:40, John Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com> wrote:

> In the interest of moving this forward, perhaps we can focus on the
> membership question for now.
>
> So far we have a couple of suggestions on the table:
>
>    1. a model somewhat based on OSGeo's charter membership, using
>    participation and positive attributes as criteria for nomination
>    2. free membership that requires an action each year to remain a
>    member, even if it's clicking a link in an email or something trivial
>
> Option 1 has featured more heavily in this discussion, am I right to read
> that as having general support? Any arguments against? Any other proposals
> we should consider?
>
> If we have general support for option 1, let's start fleshing it out. I've
> started a Google doc [1] for collaborative editing, we can move this to the
> wiki when it's done. It's open for commenting, if you want to help edit,
> please ask for access.
>
> Board & community input please.
>
> Cheers
> John
>
> [1]
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14_6Ru8Xy5jGIuWXysuIJQwQonmjhtlpmHbqVwtOsUNA
> _______________________________________________
> Oceania mailing list
> Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/oceania/attachments/20190908/d58bcb51/attachment.html>