Conference Committee Guidelines

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Conference Committee Guidelines

Angelos Tzotsos
Dear Conference Committee,

Following up on your recent motion to update your membership policies
and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the board has held a
video meeting to discuss the issue of committee guidelines.

As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee
guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our
committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to
participation.

There is a wiki page here
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more
information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs).
There are some examples of different committees doing their thing here
(https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).

Best regards,
Angelos

--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos       

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Conference Committee Guidelines

stevenfeldman
I have already advised the conference committee that I will be standing down as chair following the completion of the FOSS4G 2018 selection process.

Can I ask someone else to respond to this request
______
Steven


On 5 Dec 2016, at 17:17, Angelos Tzotsos <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear Conference Committee,

Following up on your recent motion to update your membership policies and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the board has held a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee guidelines.

As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to participation.

There is a wiki page here https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs). There are some examples of different committees doing their thing here (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).

Best regards,
Angelos

--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos



_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Conference Committee Guidelines

Angelos Tzotsos
In reply to this post by Angelos Tzotsos
Another item that I would like to bring to your attention is the budget:

The board is putting together a budget for 2017. Last year we did this
according to a breakdown of different activities [1]. This year we would
like to provide a budget for each committee.

Does the conference committee need any budget for the next year? Please
let us know.

Best regards,
Angelos

[1]
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_of_Directors#Operational_Budget_for_2016


On 12/05/2016 07:17 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:

> Dear Conference Committee,
>
> Following up on your recent motion to update your membership policies
> and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the board has held
> a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee guidelines.
>
> As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee
> guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our
> committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to
> participation.
>
> There is a wiki page here
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more
> information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs).
> There are some examples of different committees doing their thing here
> (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).
>
> Best regards,
> Angelos
>



--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Conference Committee Guidelines

Angelos Tzotsos
In reply to this post by stevenfeldman
Thank you Steven.

I was hopping that you would reconsider this decision.

Best,
Angelos

On 12/05/2016 07:47 PM, Steven Feldman wrote:

> I have already advised the conference committee that I will be standing down as chair following the completion of the FOSS4G 2018 selection process.
>
> Can I ask someone else to respond to this request
> ______
> Steven
>
>
>> On 5 Dec 2016, at 17:17, Angelos Tzotsos <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Conference Committee,
>>
>> Following up on your recent motion to update your membership policies and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the board has held a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee guidelines.
>>
>> As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to participation.
>>
>> There is a wiki page here https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs). There are some examples of different committees doing their thing here (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Angelos
>>
>> --
>> Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
>> OSGeo Charter Member
>> http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos       
>>
>


--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Conference Committee Guidelines

stevenfeldman
I think I have run out of energy/enthusiasm to chair the CC. I will remain a member of the CC until there is a revised policy on rotation of members and it is my turn to stand down

It’s up to the CC to decide whether to appoint another chairman or whether they can proceed without a chair. If our sole activity is the annual FOSS4G selection it arguably doesn’t need a chair.
______
Steven


On 5 Dec 2016, at 18:49, Angelos Tzotsos <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thank you Steven.

I was hopping that you would reconsider this decision.

Best,
Angelos

On 12/05/2016 07:47 PM, Steven Feldman wrote:
I have already advised the conference committee that I will be standing down as chair following the completion of the FOSS4G 2018 selection process.

Can I ask someone else to respond to this request
______
Steven


On 5 Dec 2016, at 17:17, Angelos Tzotsos <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear Conference Committee,

Following up on your recent motion to update your membership policies and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the board has held a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee guidelines.

As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to participation.

There is a wiki page here https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs). There are some examples of different committees doing their thing here (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).

Best regards,
Angelos

--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos




--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos



_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Conference Committee Guidelines

stevenfeldman
In reply to this post by Angelos Tzotsos
Ideally the next chair would respond to this request.

Does anyone on the CC have ideas for 2017 that would require budget?
______
Steven


On 5 Dec 2016, at 18:45, Angelos Tzotsos <[hidden email]> wrote:

Another item that I would like to bring to your attention is the budget:

The board is putting together a budget for 2017. Last year we did this according to a breakdown of different activities [1]. This year we would like to provide a budget for each committee.

Does the conference committee need any budget for the next year? Please let us know.

Best regards,
Angelos

[1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_of_Directors#Operational_Budget_for_2016


On 12/05/2016 07:17 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
Dear Conference Committee,

Following up on your recent motion to update your membership policies and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the board has held a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee guidelines.

As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to participation.

There is a wiki page here https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs). There are some examples of different committees doing their thing here (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).

Best regards,
Angelos




--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos



_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Conference Committee Guidelines

Cameron Shorter
In reply to this post by Angelos Tzotsos
OSGeo board,

I suspect you'll get a minimal response to a call for membership policies.

The reasons are relatively subtle. Volunteers step up to scratch an itch
if they feel there is a need. If such policies are not in place yet,
then communities probably don't feel the need for them.

Having the board direct communities to produce documents, in a
command-and-control type request is typically not how open source
communities work effectively.

I think you will find OSGeo communities work effectively, whether their
processes are written down or not.

If you haven't already read it, I suggest having a look at The Cathedral
and the Bazaar, by Eric Raymond. In particular, this chapter:

http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s11.html

I suggest that leading by example and amplifying initiatives of others
will be more effective for you than leading by directing. It will help
you as a board be more effective during your term in office.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 6/12/2016 4:17 AM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:

> Dear Conference Committee,
>
> Following up on your recent motion to update your membership policies
> and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the board has held
> a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee guidelines.
>
> As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee
> guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our
> committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to
> participation.
>
> There is a wiki page here
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more
> information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs).
> There are some examples of different committees doing their thing here
> (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).
>
> Best regards,
> Angelos
>

--
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Board] Conference Committee Guidelines

Angelos Tzotsos
Dear Cameron,

The following are my own views, not an official response from the board:

If such policy never existed and things worked well for the conference
committee, then why did the committee tried to apply a new policy? And
why did this new policy got blocked? Perhaps because it was not clear
how the committee should work in the first place?

The board is asking for a document to actually avoid this situation.
Having some (even minimal) document of how things work (and incubation
committee documents are an excellent example, thanks Jody), would avoid
such problems in the future.

I don't believe that the board is trying to lead by directing or
micro-managing the committees. We actually were all against that in the
video conference we had. But in order to get some consensus, a minimal
set of rules has to be somehow be expressed.

Please have in mind that volunteers don't only loose their interest when
formalities/bureaucracy take over, but also when things are not
transparent or when major conflicts happen. I am guessing that Steven
did not step down as a chair just because the new policy didn't go
through, but also by being involved in a conflict with long e-mail
threads etc. The board discussion was towards making things more
transparent and open. It was also clear that the "committee guidelines"
on our wiki are not a formal document but just an example, and that
committees are free to do their own thing.

Regarding your reference to the Eric Raymond document, personally I find
it offensive that you question us being aware of it, or having read it.

In any case, thank you for your input.

Regards,
Angelos

On 12/06/2016 12:48 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:

> OSGeo board,
>
> I suspect you'll get a minimal response to a call for membership
> policies.
>
> The reasons are relatively subtle. Volunteers step up to scratch an
> itch if they feel there is a need. If such policies are not in place
> yet, then communities probably don't feel the need for them.
>
> Having the board direct communities to produce documents, in a
> command-and-control type request is typically not how open source
> communities work effectively.
>
> I think you will find OSGeo communities work effectively, whether
> their processes are written down or not.
>
> If you haven't already read it, I suggest having a look at The
> Cathedral and the Bazaar, by Eric Raymond. In particular, this chapter:
>
> http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s11.html 
>
>
> I suggest that leading by example and amplifying initiatives of others
> will be more effective for you than leading by directing. It will help
> you as a board be more effective during your term in office.
>
> Warm regards, Cameron
>
> On 6/12/2016 4:17 AM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>> Dear Conference Committee,
>>
>> Following up on your recent motion to update your membership policies
>> and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the board has held
>> a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee guidelines.
>>
>> As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee
>> guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our
>> committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to
>> participation.
>>
>> There is a wiki page here
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more
>> information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs).
>> There are some examples of different committees doing their thing
>> here (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Angelos
>>
>


--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Board] Conference Committee Guidelines

Cameron Shorter
Hi Angelos,

I'm sorry my email comes across as offensive. On re-reading what I said,
I can see that it sounds patronising. I'm sorry for my rudeness. I do
believe that process helps communities work more efficiently and it
helps with transparency. So the goal is admirable.

The process for putting guidelines in place for the conference committee
have been tainted by an ineffective attempt of the community to create
such a process.

To summarise, Steven volunteered to create such a process, based on a
mandate from a face-to-face meeting of some of the conference committee
members. He put the process forward, tweaked it based on feedback,
obtained a vote of approval from the majority of members. This is
everything you'd want from a volunteer. Two committee members (who also
happen to be on the board) applied veto votes to the proposed conference
committee process. Resolution stagnated and a significant amount of time
was wasted. This has resulted in no mandate. I'd argue that next steps
in obtaining a conference committee process is for the people who
provided veto to step up to the task creating an alternative process
which the majority of the conference committee prefer over the existing
proposal. Based our recent experience, this will be a lot of effort.
Alternatively, these people can withdraw their veto vote and accept the
currently proposed voting process.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 7/12/2016 12:28 AM, Marc Vloemans wrote:

> +1
>
> Perhaps it is possible that the board gives some back ground on the 'why' of the request.....? Hopefully taking away the current impression of being directive....
>
> As stated in earlier mails; given recent discussions on the above lists, it seems the focus is still on other things than where we (as a community) want to go.
>
> Reiterating, I still miss a process in which internal stakeholders/participants/members are solicited for their input. Strategising is a process: continuous, participatory, focussed, conscious.
>
>  From a Marketing perspective; we are currently working on a marketing strategy. Including, which present and future stakeholders does OSGeo need to reach out to, where are they, by which means/channels and with what appropriate messages/products/services?
>
> I rather work on that than on guidelines
>
> Kind regards,
> Marc Vloemans

On 6/12/2016 11:48 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:

> Dear Cameron,
>
> The following are my own views, not an official response from the board:
>
> If such policy never existed and things worked well for the conference
> committee, then why did the committee tried to apply a new policy? And
> why did this new policy got blocked? Perhaps because it was not clear
> how the committee should work in the first place?
>
> The board is asking for a document to actually avoid this situation.
> Having some (even minimal) document of how things work (and incubation
> committee documents are an excellent example, thanks Jody), would
> avoid such problems in the future.
>
> I don't believe that the board is trying to lead by directing or
> micro-managing the committees. We actually were all against that in
> the video conference we had. But in order to get some consensus, a
> minimal set of rules has to be somehow be expressed.
>
> Please have in mind that volunteers don't only loose their interest
> when formalities/bureaucracy take over, but also when things are not
> transparent or when major conflicts happen. I am guessing that Steven
> did not step down as a chair just because the new policy didn't go
> through, but also by being involved in a conflict with long e-mail
> threads etc. The board discussion was towards making things more
> transparent and open. It was also clear that the "committee
> guidelines" on our wiki are not a formal document but just an example,
> and that committees are free to do their own thing.
>
> Regarding your reference to the Eric Raymond document, personally I
> find it offensive that you question us being aware of it, or having
> read it.
>
> In any case, thank you for your input.
>
> Regards,
> Angelos
>
> On 12/06/2016 12:48 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>> OSGeo board,
>>
>> I suspect you'll get a minimal response to a call for membership
>> policies.
>>
>> The reasons are relatively subtle. Volunteers step up to scratch an
>> itch if they feel there is a need. If such policies are not in place
>> yet, then communities probably don't feel the need for them.
>>
>> Having the board direct communities to produce documents, in a
>> command-and-control type request is typically not how open source
>> communities work effectively.
>>
>> I think you will find OSGeo communities work effectively, whether
>> their processes are written down or not.
>>
>> If you haven't already read it, I suggest having a look at The
>> Cathedral and the Bazaar, by Eric Raymond. In particular, this chapter:
>>
>> http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s11.html 
>>
>>
>> I suggest that leading by example and amplifying initiatives of
>> others will be more effective for you than leading by directing. It
>> will help you as a board be more effective during your term in office.
>>
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>
>> On 6/12/2016 4:17 AM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>>> Dear Conference Committee,
>>>
>>> Following up on your recent motion to update your membership
>>> policies and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the
>>> board has held a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee
>>> guidelines.
>>>
>>> As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee
>>> guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our
>>> committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to
>>> participation.
>>>
>>> There is a wiki page here
>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more
>>> information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs).
>>> There are some examples of different committees doing their thing
>>> here (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Angelos
>>>
>>
>
>

--
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Board] Conference Committee Guidelines

Angelos Tzotsos
Hi Cameron, Marc, all,

Thank you for your e-mails, your input is much appreciated.

The board decision came after a long f2f discussion and was a result of
a compromise between many voices and concerns. Since it was a f2f
meeting, it was difficult for the board to provide a full discussion
log, and this might have caused this interpretation of the board trying
to micro-manage the committees. This is not the case.

What happened is that we reviewed how some committees have defined rules
on how they work (we even talked about board voting rules, especially
about the veto votes - which by the way are not mentioned in the
by-laws). We also discussed about the committee guidelines wiki page [1]
that caused much discussion in the conference committee thread, and the
result was that wiki pages are not considered official documents. Jody
made the effort to update the wiki page [1] and make it more generic, so
that committees actually feel free to do their own thing.

All, in case you haven't done so already, please take some time to read
the new version of the committee guidelines wiki page [1], it might help
you in your committee or PSC. Also you can choose to ignore it and make
your own decision process. In any case, please create a document on how
you choose to work, it is very important for transparency and this is
why the board wants to be able to review this document if needed.

Regarding the specific conference committee issue, it could (and still
can) have been worked out (with or without consensus, with or without a
veto voting system). The problem I see is that nothing happened after
the long period of disagreement and no one raised (or had the energy to
raise) a new motion to be voted (e.g. anyone in the committee could have
re-raised the initial motion for an override vote after 2-3 days of
discussion). At least this is how I understand the veto system, and how
it is expressed in the board voting procedure wiki page [2]. If the veto
system does not apply in your case, then the first motion already passed
by majority...

Marc, personally, I totally support your energy and effort to work on
the marketing strategy as a first priority. If you feel that the
marketing committee is operating in a healthy way as is, you can focus
on the marketing strategy first and think/propose/draft a minimal
document on how you vote/make decisions at a later stage. The board
request did not include any deadline for this ;)

Best regards,
Angelos

[1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines
[2] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Voting_Procedure

On 12/06/2016 10:27 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:

> Hi Angelos,
>
> I'm sorry my email comes across as offensive. On re-reading what I
> said, I can see that it sounds patronising. I'm sorry for my rudeness.
> I do believe that process helps communities work more efficiently and
> it helps with transparency. So the goal is admirable.
>
> The process for putting guidelines in place for the conference
> committee have been tainted by an ineffective attempt of the community
> to create such a process.
>
> To summarise, Steven volunteered to create such a process, based on a
> mandate from a face-to-face meeting of some of the conference
> committee members. He put the process forward, tweaked it based on
> feedback, obtained a vote of approval from the majority of members.
> This is everything you'd want from a volunteer. Two committee members
> (who also happen to be on the board) applied veto votes to the
> proposed conference committee process. Resolution stagnated and a
> significant amount of time was wasted. This has resulted in no
> mandate. I'd argue that next steps in obtaining a conference committee
> process is for the people who provided veto to step up to the task
> creating an alternative process which the majority of the conference
> committee prefer over the existing proposal. Based our recent
> experience, this will be a lot of effort. Alternatively, these people
> can withdraw their veto vote and accept the currently proposed voting
> process.
>
> Warm regards, Cameron
>
> On 7/12/2016 12:28 AM, Marc Vloemans wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> Perhaps it is possible that the board gives some back ground on the
>> 'why' of the request.....? Hopefully taking away the current
>> impression of being directive....
>>
>> As stated in earlier mails; given recent discussions on the above
>> lists, it seems the focus is still on other things than where we (as
>> a community) want to go.
>>
>> Reiterating, I still miss a process in which internal
>> stakeholders/participants/members are solicited for their input.
>> Strategising is a process: continuous, participatory, focussed,
>> conscious.
>>
>>  From a Marketing perspective; we are currently working on a
>> marketing strategy. Including, which present and future stakeholders
>> does OSGeo need to reach out to, where are they, by which
>> means/channels and with what appropriate messages/products/services?
>>
>> I rather work on that than on guidelines
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Marc Vloemans
>
> On 6/12/2016 11:48 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>> Dear Cameron,
>>
>> The following are my own views, not an official response from the board:
>>
>> If such policy never existed and things worked well for the
>> conference committee, then why did the committee tried to apply a new
>> policy? And why did this new policy got blocked? Perhaps because it
>> was not clear how the committee should work in the first place?
>>
>> The board is asking for a document to actually avoid this situation.
>> Having some (even minimal) document of how things work (and
>> incubation committee documents are an excellent example, thanks
>> Jody), would avoid such problems in the future.
>>
>> I don't believe that the board is trying to lead by directing or
>> micro-managing the committees. We actually were all against that in
>> the video conference we had. But in order to get some consensus, a
>> minimal set of rules has to be somehow be expressed.
>>
>> Please have in mind that volunteers don't only loose their interest
>> when formalities/bureaucracy take over, but also when things are not
>> transparent or when major conflicts happen. I am guessing that Steven
>> did not step down as a chair just because the new policy didn't go
>> through, but also by being involved in a conflict with long e-mail
>> threads etc. The board discussion was towards making things more
>> transparent and open. It was also clear that the "committee
>> guidelines" on our wiki are not a formal document but just an
>> example, and that committees are free to do their own thing.
>>
>> Regarding your reference to the Eric Raymond document, personally I
>> find it offensive that you question us being aware of it, or having
>> read it.
>>
>> In any case, thank you for your input.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Angelos
>>
>> On 12/06/2016 12:48 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>> OSGeo board,
>>>
>>> I suspect you'll get a minimal response to a call for membership
>>> policies.
>>>
>>> The reasons are relatively subtle. Volunteers step up to scratch an
>>> itch if they feel there is a need. If such policies are not in place
>>> yet, then communities probably don't feel the need for them.
>>>
>>> Having the board direct communities to produce documents, in a
>>> command-and-control type request is typically not how open source
>>> communities work effectively.
>>>
>>> I think you will find OSGeo communities work effectively, whether
>>> their processes are written down or not.
>>>
>>> If you haven't already read it, I suggest having a look at The
>>> Cathedral and the Bazaar, by Eric Raymond. In particular, this chapter:
>>>
>>> http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s11.html 
>>>
>>>
>>> I suggest that leading by example and amplifying initiatives of
>>> others will be more effective for you than leading by directing. It
>>> will help you as a board be more effective during your term in office.
>>>
>>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>>
>>> On 6/12/2016 4:17 AM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>>>> Dear Conference Committee,
>>>>
>>>> Following up on your recent motion to update your membership
>>>> policies and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the
>>>> board has held a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee
>>>> guidelines.
>>>>
>>>> As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee
>>>> guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our
>>>> committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to
>>>> participation.
>>>>
>>>> There is a wiki page here
>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more
>>>> information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs).
>>>> There are some examples of different committees doing their thing
>>>> here (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Angelos
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

R: [Board] Conference Committee Guidelines

Maria Antonia Brovelli
In reply to this post by Angelos Tzotsos
Dear Angelos 

In the history of the long discussion in the Conference Committee the ending is missing and I will shortly summarise it:

- Many members of the Committee were complaining about the fact that governance of the committee is not part of the duties of the Committee itself

- At this point I proposed that we can ask the Board to express itself 

- When I was elected in the Board, I immediately asked to discuss about what we are expecting in the governance of the Committees and, as Board, we decided that is good that every Committee proposes its governance to be then discussed with the Board. 

Unfortunately there are some (luckily few, because we are a wonderful community) members who tend to be offensive with other members. 

I want to clarify that me too I'm volunteering for OSGeo, generally "working" the weekend and during the night (exactly like now) and that, as a human being, I tend to become sad and demotivated when people are offending me. 

It is not the first time that I have read more or less the same words (and cited tge same book) and I wonder if there is the possibility of being less aggressive against me first because I am a human being and second because I am doing as much as I can for this community. 

I will take same days of rest. 
Lovely night/day to everybody.
Maria



Inviato dal mio dispositivo Samsung


-------- Messaggio originale --------
Da: Angelos Tzotsos <[hidden email]>
Data: 06/12/16 13:48 (GMT+01:00)
A: Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>, [hidden email], [hidden email]
Oggetto: Re: [Board] [OSGeo-Conf] Conference Committee Guidelines

Dear Cameron,

The following are my own views, not an official response from the board:

If such policy never existed and things worked well for the conference
committee, then why did the committee tried to apply a new policy? And
why did this new policy got blocked? Perhaps because it was not clear
how the committee should work in the first place?

The board is asking for a document to actually avoid this situation.
Having some (even minimal) document of how things work (and incubation
committee documents are an excellent example, thanks Jody), would avoid
such problems in the future.

I don't believe that the board is trying to lead by directing or
micro-managing the committees. We actually were all against that in the
video conference we had. But in order to get some consensus, a minimal
set of rules has to be somehow be expressed.

Please have in mind that volunteers don't only loose their interest when
formalities/bureaucracy take over, but also when things are not
transparent or when major conflicts happen. I am guessing that Steven
did not step down as a chair just because the new policy didn't go
through, but also by being involved in a conflict with long e-mail
threads etc. The board discussion was towards making things more
transparent and open. It was also clear that the "committee guidelines"
on our wiki are not a formal document but just an example, and that
committees are free to do their own thing.

Regarding your reference to the Eric Raymond document, personally I find
it offensive that you question us being aware of it, or having read it.

In any case, thank you for your input.

Regards,
Angelos

On 12/06/2016 12:48 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> OSGeo board,
>
> I suspect you'll get a minimal response to a call for membership
> policies.
>
> The reasons are relatively subtle. Volunteers step up to scratch an
> itch if they feel there is a need. If such policies are not in place
> yet, then communities probably don't feel the need for them.
>
> Having the board direct communities to produce documents, in a
> command-and-control type request is typically not how open source
> communities work effectively.
>
> I think you will find OSGeo communities work effectively, whether
> their processes are written down or not.
>
> If you haven't already read it, I suggest having a look at The
> Cathedral and the Bazaar, by Eric Raymond. In particular, this chapter:
>
> http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s11.html
>
>
> I suggest that leading by example and amplifying initiatives of others
> will be more effective for you than leading by directing. It will help
> you as a board be more effective during your term in office.
>
> Warm regards, Cameron
>
> On 6/12/2016 4:17 AM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>> Dear Conference Committee,
>>
>> Following up on your recent motion to update your membership policies
>> and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the board has held
>> a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee guidelines.
>>
>> As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee
>> guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our
>> committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to
>> participation.
>>
>> There is a wiki page here
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more
>> information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs).
>> There are some examples of different committees doing their thing
>> here (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Angelos
>>
>


--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Board] R: Conference Committee Guidelines

Suchith Anand
Dear all,

We are all humans and sometimes unintentional misunderstanding  happens. So i humbly request everyone to please do not take anything personal. We are an open community and we value different opinions and perspectives. Hence we have lively discussions on all topics and we learn from each other.

All our amazing volunteers are putting thier time and efforts for OSGeo and we are all very grateful to everyone. We are all working for Open Principles.

May the FOSS be with everyone...

Best wishes,

Suchith


________________________________________
From: Board <[hidden email]> on behalf of Maria Antonia Brovelli <[hidden email]>
Sent: 07 December 2016 11:21 PM
To: Angelos Tzotsos; Cameron Shorter; [hidden email]; [hidden email]
Subject: [Board] R:  [OSGeo-Conf] Conference Committee Guidelines

Dear Angelos

In the history of the long discussion in the Conference Committee the ending is missing and I will shortly summarise it:

- Many members of the Committee were complaining about the fact that governance of the committee is not part of the duties of the Committee itself

- At this point I proposed that we can ask the Board to express itself

- When I was elected in the Board, I immediately asked to discuss about what we are expecting in the governance of the Committees and, as Board, we decided that is good that every Committee proposes its governance to be then discussed with the Board.

Unfortunately there are some (luckily few, because we are a wonderful community) members who tend to be offensive with other members.

I want to clarify that me too I'm volunteering for OSGeo, generally "working" the weekend and during the night (exactly like now) and that, as a human being, I tend to become sad and demotivated when people are offending me.

It is not the first time that I have read more or less the same words (and cited tge same book) and I wonder if there is the possibility of being less aggressive against me first because I am a human being and second because I am doing as much as I can for this community.

I will take same days of rest.
Lovely night/day to everybody.
Maria



Inviato dal mio dispositivo Samsung


-------- Messaggio originale --------
Da: Angelos Tzotsos <[hidden email]>
Data: 06/12/16 13:48 (GMT+01:00)
A: Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>, [hidden email], [hidden email]
Oggetto: Re: [Board] [OSGeo-Conf] Conference Committee Guidelines

Dear Cameron,

The following are my own views, not an official response from the board:

If such policy never existed and things worked well for the conference
committee, then why did the committee tried to apply a new policy? And
why did this new policy got blocked? Perhaps because it was not clear
how the committee should work in the first place?

The board is asking for a document to actually avoid this situation.
Having some (even minimal) document of how things work (and incubation
committee documents are an excellent example, thanks Jody), would avoid
such problems in the future.

I don't believe that the board is trying to lead by directing or
micro-managing the committees. We actually were all against that in the
video conference we had. But in order to get some consensus, a minimal
set of rules has to be somehow be expressed.

Please have in mind that volunteers don't only loose their interest when
formalities/bureaucracy take over, but also when things are not
transparent or when major conflicts happen. I am guessing that Steven
did not step down as a chair just because the new policy didn't go
through, but also by being involved in a conflict with long e-mail
threads etc. The board discussion was towards making things more
transparent and open. It was also clear that the "committee guidelines"
on our wiki are not a formal document but just an example, and that
committees are free to do their own thing.

Regarding your reference to the Eric Raymond document, personally I find
it offensive that you question us being aware of it, or having read it.

In any case, thank you for your input.

Regards,
Angelos

On 12/06/2016 12:48 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:

> OSGeo board,
>
> I suspect you'll get a minimal response to a call for membership
> policies.
>
> The reasons are relatively subtle. Volunteers step up to scratch an
> itch if they feel there is a need. If such policies are not in place
> yet, then communities probably don't feel the need for them.
>
> Having the board direct communities to produce documents, in a
> command-and-control type request is typically not how open source
> communities work effectively.
>
> I think you will find OSGeo communities work effectively, whether
> their processes are written down or not.
>
> If you haven't already read it, I suggest having a look at The
> Cathedral and the Bazaar, by Eric Raymond. In particular, this chapter:
>
> http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s11.html
>
>
> I suggest that leading by example and amplifying initiatives of others
> will be more effective for you than leading by directing. It will help
> you as a board be more effective during your term in office.
>
> Warm regards, Cameron
>
> On 6/12/2016 4:17 AM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>> Dear Conference Committee,
>>
>> Following up on your recent motion to update your membership policies
>> and process, and the issues raised by this motion, the board has held
>> a video meeting to discuss the issue of committee guidelines.
>>
>> As a result, the board is asking everyone to write down "committee
>> guidelines" on how each functions.  The idea is to make sure our
>> committees are transparent in their decision making, and open to
>> participation.
>>
>> There is a wiki page here
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines that provides more
>> information (and helpfully provides guidance for committee chairs).
>> There are some examples of different committees doing their thing
>> here (https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines#Examples).
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Angelos
>>
>


--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board




This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev