[OSGeo Oceania] membership - elections - AGM

[Bruce Bannerman]

Cameron,

I like the idea of self identification. Would you just see this as being a declaration of OO membership within the existing OSGeo Advocates process, or a separate process?

Bruce


> On 26 Sep 2019, at 06:14, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> +1 to single tier membership with possibility of adding a self identifying system later.
> 
> We previously did this with OSGeo Advocates: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Advocate#Introduction
> 
>> On 25/9/19 6:43 pm, John Bryant 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
> -- 
> Cameron Shorter
> Technology Demystifier
> Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
> 
> M +61 (0) 419 142 254
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190926/77d42ea8/attachment.html>