[OSGeo Oceania] membership - elections - AGM

[Duncan Jackson]

+1

Once we establish this membership type, I feel we could very easily extend
it with some process whereby people in the community can self-identify as a
"community member", or "citizen", or something like that. But there is much
to do in the next 2-3 months, and I feel we really need to stay focused on
that which must be done.

On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 18:14, John Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all, really pleased to see all this input, thanks for your time &
> energy.
>
> This is obviously a topic that people feel strongly about, which is great.
> I feel that we're all aligned on the key principles: that we want to make
> the organisation accessible to new members, and we want it to be run
> responsibly, ie. members should be able to influence how it's run. There's
> a bit of distance between the various proposals on the table so far, but
> they're all aiming at these principles. To make progress, it looks like
> we're going to need to make some compromises.
>
> I fully agree with Edoardo's reasoning for preferring a home-grown
> approach to membership. We're an OSGeo local chapter, but we're also more
> than that, notably (as Ed mentioned) we're in the process of applying to be
> a local chapter of OSMF as well. We need to ensure we wholeheartedly
> embrace the parts of our community that don't fall under the OSGeo umbrella.
>
> I think we're roughly all on the same page re: voting membership, ie. we
> need members who vote, and they should pass some sort of eligibility
> threshold.
>
> The key point of disagreement seems to be whether we have a 2nd tier of
> membership with a lower eligibility threshold, one where anyone can join,
> but there are no rights/responsibilities associated with it. There have
> been some questions asked about what real value this provides to such a
> member and to the organisation, which I struggle to answer. I'm also
> concerned about the extra messaging that would be required to communicate
> this to the community to overcome any potential confusion... this
> translates to work, and as a volunteer-run organisation, our time & energy
> have limits. Finally, I don't see that the eligibility threshold we're
> considering for membership is so high that it functionally excludes anyone
> who truly wants to be a part of this.
>
> I strongly identify with the value proposition of making the organisation
> accessible to everyone though, so this is difficult for me...
>
> But in the interest of moving forward, and focusing on the most urgent
> outcome (determine a process for a voting membership), let me ask this
> question: *Can we live with a single membership type for now, which
> includes voting privileges?*
>
> I believe this single membership type will sufficiently address our key
> priorities (voting membership, protect the org).
>
> Once we establish this membership type, I feel we could very easily extend
> it with some process whereby people in the community can self-identify as a
> "community member", or "citizen", or something like that. But there is much
> to do in the next 2-3 months, and I feel we really need to stay focused on
> that which *must* be done.
>
> Something needs to give, so I'm hoping for some compromise.
>
> Thanks
> John
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190925/053bf35e/attachment.html>