|
|
123
|
|
Hi Jeff,
Thanks for your comments here and elsewhere. I appreciate that you are taking ownership of actions that have caused conflicts in the past. My one follow up comment is that you should, in my opinion, be careful about pointing to the excuse of passion in situations where your words or actions negatively effect others and the community. While your passion may be a significant reason for you to act certain ways, blaming negative behavior solely on such a positive attribute can potentially dismiss the negativity and the harm that the behavior can bring, and can allow for similar things to play out in the future.
I respect your apologies here and elsewhere, and again appreciate you responding to the concerns presented. If you are elected, I look forward to you bringing your passion in a positive way to the board. If there comes a time where the referenced concerns come up again in the future, I hope you will not mind if I call it out, and point back to this time and these discussions. I will do so as a friend, who is working with you to help make our community even more awesome.
Best, Rob _______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
Administrator
|
Hi Rob,
Thank you for this thoughtful message. I will think more on your
advice, to be careful to not to blame negative behavior on a positive
attribute, so as to not allow it to happen again. I look forward to
working with you, even if I am not elected, to as you said perfectly,
make this community more awesome! Let's plan on meeting for an early
morning breakfast soon at a FOSS4G. -jeff
Good luck to all the great candidates.
On 2017-10-15 7:08 PM, Rob Emanuele wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Thanks for your comments here and elsewhere. I appreciate that you are
> taking ownership of actions that have caused conflicts in the past. My
> one follow up comment is that you should, in my opinion, be careful
> about pointing to the excuse of passion in situations where your words
> or actions negatively effect others and the community. While your
> passion may be a significant reason for you to act certain ways, blaming
> negative behavior solely on such a positive attribute can potentially
> dismiss the negativity and the harm that the behavior can bring, and can
> allow for similar things to play out in the future.
>
> I respect your apologies here and elsewhere, and again appreciate you
> responding to the concerns presented. If you are elected, I look forward
> to you bringing your passion in a positive way to the board. If there
> comes a time where the referenced concerns come up again in the future,
> I hope you will not mind if I call it out, and point back to this time
> and these discussions. I will do so as a friend, who is working with you
> to help make our community even more awesome.
>
> Best,
> Rob
>
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Jeff McKenna
> < [hidden email] <mailto: [hidden email]>>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> Thanks for voicing your concerns about me. You are a leader and
> your words are very powerful, I have much respect for your efforts.
>
> I apologize if my passion sometimes causes conflict on mailing
> lists. When I represent the OSGeo community, I feel the need to
> always be open and relay concerns, as you have done here. I need to
> be more caring and respectful to others in this community.
>
> I hope my open responses help answer a few questions, understand me
> a little more, or at least bring more questions and good
> discussions, so we can keep making OSGeo fun and always growing.
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
> On 2017-10-12 1:32 PM, Rob Emanuele wrote:
>
> Hi Toshikazu, Nick,
>
> Despite the fact that I have not been around long enough or have
> not been in the right places to see directly a lot of the impact
> that Jeff has had on the community, it's very clear from many
> accounts that he has been an amazing and important figure in
> OSGeo (a Sol Katz award speaks very clearly to this!). However I
> feel remiss if I don't point out the following observation: as a
> newer member to the OSGeo community in the past couple of years,
> I've seen some intense and surprising conflict happen on the
> mailing lists that were centered around or included Jeff, which
> played out in ways that I believe were not good for community,
> and were also not healing in their conclusions.
>
> If there is a custom of only speaking positively on someone's
> nomination thread, then I apologize. I do not want to detract
> from praise that is well deserved. Is there a more appropriate
> place talk through, address and hopefully dismiss reservations
> about a nominee, and to also call for answers to the questions
> Cameron has posted?
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Toshikazu SETO
> < [hidden email] <mailto: [hidden email]>
> <mailto: [hidden email] <mailto: [hidden email]>>> wrote:
>
> I also support the second nomination of Jeff McKenna.
>
> He think important to friendship with all OSGeo
> communities, because
> I am proud of his philosophy.
>
> I think, this thread will use comments on nominations and
> should not
> deep discuss to previous FOSS4G
> circumstanceand responsibility.
>
> Best regards,
> Toshikazu
>
> _
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
Hi Venka, all,
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi Venka,
>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan
> < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi Eli,
>>
>> First of all, thanks to Jorge for volunteering to be co-CRO
>> and fixing the CRO alias promptly.
>
> Yes, thanks Jorge.
>
>>
>> Regarding your other comment reproduced below;
>>
>> The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>> their last meeting,
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it is
>> of no concern to the Board.
>>
>>
>> The question of review this topic at the 2017-10-05 board meeting did not
>> arise
>> as the nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-08.
>
> Thanks for fixing my mistake, I misunderstood the dates and thought
> that nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-01. Sorry to
> suggest that it was of no concern to the Board when it is actually
> unknown.
It appears that voting has now started and I don't see any Board
threads on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2017-October/thread.html>
>>
>> I would like to assure you that I share your concern about the proper
>> process.
>
> Great, I hope that the Board follows the proper process. I'll stop
> making noise and allow the proper process to work.
>
Should I now conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board?
Best regards, Eli
> Best regards, Eli
>
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Venka
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/12/2017 1:58 AM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>>
>> Hi Eli,
>>
>> I did it yesterday without having a ticket involved. My bad sorry.
>>
>> I confirm that the CRO alias is now sending emails only to Vasile and me.
>> --
>> Jorge Sanz
>> https://jorgesanz.net>>
>> Sent from my phone, excuse my brevity and typos
>>
>> El 11 oct. 2017 18:36, "Eli Adam" < [hidden email]> escribió:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Fenoy Gerald < [hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Eli,
>> as you may have notice, Jeff has stepped down from his position of
>>
>> co-CRO when accepting the Nicolas’ nomination [1].
>>
>> I didn't find that thread while scanning through the archive. Thanks
>> for pointing it out to me.
>>
>> Jeff was involved in the charter member election process as co-CRO but
>>
>> he is no more so, I guess, there is no issue for the board election.
>>
>> Was the [hidden email] email alias updated? I didn't notice a ticket
>> for that. I'm impressed that there is so little concern about the
>> proper process. The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>> their last meeting,
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it is
>> of no concern to the Board.
>>
>> Best regards, Eli
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> [1] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-October/036449.html>>
>>
>> Gérald Fenoy
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay>>
>> Le 11 oct. 2017 à 16:04, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> a écrit :
>>
>> Nicolas,
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, nicolas bozon < [hidden email]>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> It is my honor to nominate Jeff McKenna for the OSGeo Board of
>>
>> Directors
>>
>> election.
>>
>> I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO accept
>> your nomination, https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>> In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>> remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>>
>> Most of you knows Jeff's energy and passion for everything OSGeo, and i
>> would probably be mistaken trying to summarize his countless
>>
>> contributions
>>
>> over the years, at every level of our Foundation. His leadership and
>>
>> long
>>
>> involvement in the OSGeo and FOSS4G communities made him the Winner of
>>
>> the
>>
>> Solz Katz Award in 2016, and i cannot add more. For those of you who
>>
>> may
>>
>> really not know Jeff yet, the User:Jeff_McKenna wiki page is a good
>>
>> read
>>
>> before you vote.
>>
>> Jeff already served three times at the board and has a deep
>>
>> understanding of
>>
>> both the director role and the current OSGeo strategic plan.
>>
>> Experienced
>>
>> with OSGeo governance and bylaws, Jeff also knows a lot about projects
>>
>> and
>>
>> people. He is always ready to help build locally and to represent
>>
>> globally.
>>
>> Jeff is a great communicator and enthusiastic community leader, and i
>> believe he will be an excellent OSGeo director again. Please let us all
>> welcome Jeff back at the Board!
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Nicolas Bozon
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Jeff McKenna agreed to be nominated and i decided to send the
>>
>> nomination
>>
>> directly to the Discuss list with cc to CRO, so it avoids Jeff to
>>
>> confirm to
>>
>> himself that he accepts the nomination. The Board Nominations page
>>
>> still
>>
>> need to be updated, could you please Vasile ? Sorry for shortening the
>> nomination process in this special case.
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> The point is not to avoid Jeff confirming to himself that he accepts
>> the nomination, it is to avoid the CRO running an election and
>> counting votes when they are also standing for election. It is really
>> the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that this situation
>> doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who might accept a
>> nomination and people who might accept a nomination should not accept
>> appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the tradition of the
>> CRO being a sitting Board member with a year remaining on their term.
>> CRO is a difficult job and much credit to those who do it. Also,
>> someone (other than me) should be paying attention to the basic
>> process and raise these issues.
>>
>> Best regards, Eli
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
HI Eli,
If I recall correctly, we answered you that Jeff immediately resigned from his position as CRO and he has not been involved at all in any Board elections CRO activity so everything is correctly handled except (and we apologized for that) the lack of a Trac ticket for the alias change.
Kind regards
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Jorge Sanz < [hidden email]> wrote:
> HI Eli,
>
> If I recall correctly, we answered you that Jeff immediately resigned from
> his position as CRO and he has not been involved at all in any Board
> elections CRO activity so everything is correctly handled except (and we
> apologized for that) the lack of a Trac ticket for the alias change.
Thanks Jorge. I know those are the events that happened, however, I
never saw the Board deliberate and consider whether that is acceptable
or not. In my opinion, it is not, however I'm not on the Board, nor
is one Director's opinion a position of the Board. In the absence of
any Board action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
I was left to conclude "that this issue is of no concern to the
Board."
Has the Board deliberated or considered this? Did they take a position?
The reason to have a process and follow it even when you maybe don't
"need" it, is so that you also follow the process when you *do* need
it.
Best regards, Eli
>
> Kind regards
>
>
>
> On 18 October 2017 at 18:07, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Venka, all,
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > Hi Venka,
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan
>> > < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> Hi Eli,
>> >>
>> >> First of all, thanks to Jorge for volunteering to be co-CRO
>> >> and fixing the CRO alias promptly.
>> >
>> > Yes, thanks Jorge.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Regarding your other comment reproduced below;
>> >>
>> >> The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>> >> their last meeting,
>> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it is
>> >> of no concern to the Board.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The question of review this topic at the 2017-10-05 board meeting did
>> >> not
>> >> arise
>> >> as the nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-08.
>> >
>> > Thanks for fixing my mistake, I misunderstood the dates and thought
>> > that nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-01. Sorry to
>> > suggest that it was of no concern to the Board when it is actually
>> > unknown.
>>
>> It appears that voting has now started and I don't see any Board
>> threads on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2017-October/thread.html>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> I would like to assure you that I share your concern about the proper
>> >> process.
>> >
>> > Great, I hope that the Board follows the proper process. I'll stop
>> > making noise and allow the proper process to work.
>> >
>>
>> Should I now conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board?
>>
>> Best regards, Eli
>>
>>
>> > Best regards, Eli
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Best
>> >>
>> >> Venka
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 10/12/2017 1:58 AM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Eli,
>> >>
>> >> I did it yesterday without having a ticket involved. My bad sorry.
>> >>
>> >> I confirm that the CRO alias is now sending emails only to Vasile and
>> >> me.
>> >> --
>> >> Jorge Sanz
>> >> https://jorgesanz.net>> >>
>> >> Sent from my phone, excuse my brevity and typos
>> >>
>> >> El 11 oct. 2017 18:36, "Eli Adam" < [hidden email]> escribió:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Fenoy Gerald < [hidden email]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Dear Eli,
>> >> as you may have notice, Jeff has stepped down from his position of
>> >>
>> >> co-CRO when accepting the Nicolas’ nomination [1].
>> >>
>> >> I didn't find that thread while scanning through the archive. Thanks
>> >> for pointing it out to me.
>> >>
>> >> Jeff was involved in the charter member election process as co-CRO but
>> >>
>> >> he is no more so, I guess, there is no issue for the board election.
>> >>
>> >> Was the [hidden email] email alias updated? I didn't notice a ticket
>> >> for that. I'm impressed that there is so little concern about the
>> >> proper process. The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>> >> their last meeting,
>> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it is
>> >> of no concern to the Board.
>> >>
>> >> Best regards, Eli
>> >>
>> >> Best regards,
>> >>
>> >> [1] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-October/036449.html>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Gérald Fenoy
>> >> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay>> >>
>> >> Le 11 oct. 2017 à 16:04, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> a écrit :
>> >>
>> >> Nicolas,
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, nicolas bozon < [hidden email]>
>> >>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> It is my honor to nominate Jeff McKenna for the OSGeo Board of
>> >>
>> >> Directors
>> >>
>> >> election.
>> >>
>> >> I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO accept
>> >> your nomination, https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>> >> In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>> >> remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>> >>
>> >> Most of you knows Jeff's energy and passion for everything OSGeo, and i
>> >> would probably be mistaken trying to summarize his countless
>> >>
>> >> contributions
>> >>
>> >> over the years, at every level of our Foundation. His leadership and
>> >>
>> >> long
>> >>
>> >> involvement in the OSGeo and FOSS4G communities made him the Winner of
>> >>
>> >> the
>> >>
>> >> Solz Katz Award in 2016, and i cannot add more. For those of you who
>> >>
>> >> may
>> >>
>> >> really not know Jeff yet, the User:Jeff_McKenna wiki page is a good
>> >>
>> >> read
>> >>
>> >> before you vote.
>> >>
>> >> Jeff already served three times at the board and has a deep
>> >>
>> >> understanding of
>> >>
>> >> both the director role and the current OSGeo strategic plan.
>> >>
>> >> Experienced
>> >>
>> >> with OSGeo governance and bylaws, Jeff also knows a lot about projects
>> >>
>> >> and
>> >>
>> >> people. He is always ready to help build locally and to represent
>> >>
>> >> globally.
>> >>
>> >> Jeff is a great communicator and enthusiastic community leader, and i
>> >> believe he will be an excellent OSGeo director again. Please let us all
>> >> welcome Jeff back at the Board!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Best regards,
>> >>
>> >> Nicolas Bozon
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> Jeff McKenna agreed to be nominated and i decided to send the
>> >>
>> >> nomination
>> >>
>> >> directly to the Discuss list with cc to CRO, so it avoids Jeff to
>> >>
>> >> confirm to
>> >>
>> >> himself that he accepts the nomination. The Board Nominations page
>> >>
>> >> still
>> >>
>> >> need to be updated, could you please Vasile ? Sorry for shortening the
>> >> nomination process in this special case.
>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> The point is not to avoid Jeff confirming to himself that he accepts
>> >> the nomination, it is to avoid the CRO running an election and
>> >> counting votes when they are also standing for election. It is really
>> >> the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that this situation
>> >> doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who might accept a
>> >> nomination and people who might accept a nomination should not accept
>> >> appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the tradition of the
>> >> CRO being a sitting Board member with a year remaining on their term.
>> >> CRO is a difficult job and much credit to those who do it. Also,
>> >> someone (other than me) should be paying attention to the basic
>> >> process and raise these issues.
>> >>
>> >> Best regards, Eli
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> [hidden email]
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> [hidden email]
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> [hidden email]
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> [hidden email]
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>
>
>
> --
> Jorge Sanz
> http://www.osgeo.org> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
Eli the board did not deliberate, you can see the board email list. I have been glad for individual such as yourself caring, speaking up, and hopefully attending the next board meeting.
I think we have all learned a lot this election period, and cannot thank the cro enough for keeping up.
I trust the next board meeting will provide an update from the cro and an opportunity for discussion. The board is in a strange situation during elections, handing over control of the process to the CRO, and with 1/2 the participants at the end of their term. If you track the most recent board meetings several items have been deferred to the next board, so I understand the board not feeling able to deliberate in the middle of elections.
It is also important to trust the CRO to act in good faith on behalf of our organization. I did speak up when I was concerned that member list had not been updated and would interfere in the CRO performing their task - but that was it.
This is a hard lesson to learn, when to deliberate and when to encourage. Many of the deliberations about foss4g affordability were left until the Boston F2F meeting, to avoid distracting from the excellent work being done by the BLOC. If if well intentioned, deliberating during the course of an activity can distract contributors and bring out feelings of "why bother". I think this was the bickering referenced during the candidates debate yesterday.
Finally as a candidate in this election I could not see a clear way to deliberate the current election that would not be viewed as a personal attack, or dismissed as campaigning.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
Frankly, as a current board member, from what I’ve seen, everything was properly followed. As soon as he was nominated, Jeff stepped down as co CRO. It was all above board and transparent. Sent from my iPhone Eli the board did not deliberate, you can see the board email list. I have been glad for individual such as yourself caring, speaking up, and hopefully attending the next board meeting.
I think we have all learned a lot this election period, and cannot thank the cro enough for keeping up.
I trust the next board meeting will provide an update from the cro and an opportunity for discussion. The board is in a strange situation during elections, handing over control of the process to the CRO, and with 1/2 the participants at the end of their term. If you track the most recent board meetings several items have been deferred to the next board, so I understand the board not feeling able to deliberate in the middle of elections.
It is also important to trust the CRO to act in good faith on behalf of our organization. I did speak up when I was concerned that member list had not been updated and would interfere in the CRO performing their task - but that was it.
This is a hard lesson to learn, when to deliberate and when to encourage. Many of the deliberations about foss4g affordability were left until the Boston F2F meeting, to avoid distracting from the excellent work being done by the BLOC. If if well intentioned, deliberating during the course of an activity can distract contributors and bring out feelings of "why bother". I think this was the bickering referenced during the candidates debate yesterday.
Finally as a candidate in this election I could not see a clear way to deliberate the current election that would not be viewed as a personal attack, or dismissed as campaigning.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Jody Garnett < [hidden email]> wrote:
> Eli the board did not deliberate, you can see the board email list. I have
> been glad for individual such as yourself caring, speaking up, and hopefully
> attending the next board meeting.
>
I thought that this issue might have been of enough concern for the
Board to deliberate it. Indeed, I thought that Venka's earlier
comment was an indication that that might happen.
> I think we have all learned a lot this election period, and cannot thank the
> cro enough for keeping up.
>
CRO is a very large and difficult job. Yes, great thanks to the CROs.
> I trust the next board meeting will provide an update from the cro and an
> opportunity for discussion. The board is in a strange situation during
> elections, handing over control of the process to the CRO, and with 1/2 the
> participants at the end of their term. If you track the most recent board
> meetings several items have been deferred to the next board, so I understand
> the board not feeling able to deliberate in the middle of elections.
>
Yes, the Board appoints the CRO(s) to run the elections for them.
While the Board can defer some things to future Boards (especially
future looking things), the Board is responsible for anything that
arises while they are on duty.
> It is also important to trust the CRO to act in good faith on behalf of our
> organization. I did speak up when I was concerned that member list had not
> been updated and would interfere in the CRO performing their task - but that
> was it.
>
I largely believe that once a task is delegated, that person has the
latitude to act. In this case, I would have thought it was worth
deliberation and consultation with the CRO on how they want to run
elections that don't go exactly following the process.
> This is a hard lesson to learn, when to deliberate and when to encourage.
> Many of the deliberations about foss4g affordability were left until the
> Boston F2F meeting, to avoid distracting from the excellent work being done
> by the BLOC. If if well intentioned, deliberating during the course of an
> activity can distract contributors and bring out feelings of "why bother". I
> think this was the bickering referenced during the candidates debate
> yesterday.
>
> Finally as a candidate in this election I could not see a clear way to
> deliberate the current election that would not be viewed as a personal
> attack, or dismissed as campaigning.
>
This seems rather straight forward. For the Board to deliberate this
manner fairly, directors like you who are running for reelection would
be obligated to show up for quorum and abstain from discussion and
voting. The issue would be decided by the portion of the Board with
their term running until 2018 and those who are not running for
reelection. But yes, I do see how you personally would be hampered
from really engaging this topic.
Best regards, Eli
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 18 October 2017 at 10:23, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Jorge Sanz < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > HI Eli,
>> >
>> > If I recall correctly, we answered you that Jeff immediately resigned
>> > from
>> > his position as CRO and he has not been involved at all in any Board
>> > elections CRO activity so everything is correctly handled except (and we
>> > apologized for that) the lack of a Trac ticket for the alias change.
>>
>> Thanks Jorge. I know those are the events that happened, however, I
>> never saw the Board deliberate and consider whether that is acceptable
>> or not. In my opinion, it is not, however I'm not on the Board, nor
>> is one Director's opinion a position of the Board. In the absence of
>> any Board action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>> I was left to conclude "that this issue is of no concern to the
>> Board."
>>
>> Has the Board deliberated or considered this? Did they take a position?
>>
>> The reason to have a process and follow it even when you maybe don't
>> "need" it, is so that you also follow the process when you *do* need
>> it.
>>
>> Best regards, Eli
>>
>> >
>> > Kind regards
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 18 October 2017 at 18:07, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Venka, all,
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Eli Adam < [hidden email]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hi Venka,
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan
>> >> > < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> >> Hi Eli,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> First of all, thanks to Jorge for volunteering to be co-CRO
>> >> >> and fixing the CRO alias promptly.
>> >> >
>> >> > Yes, thanks Jorge.
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Regarding your other comment reproduced below;
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>> >> >> their last meeting,
>> >> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it
>> >> >> is
>> >> >> of no concern to the Board.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The question of review this topic at the 2017-10-05 board meeting
>> >> >> did
>> >> >> not
>> >> >> arise
>> >> >> as the nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-08.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for fixing my mistake, I misunderstood the dates and thought
>> >> > that nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-01. Sorry to
>> >> > suggest that it was of no concern to the Board when it is actually
>> >> > unknown.
>> >>
>> >> It appears that voting has now started and I don't see any Board
>> >> threads on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2017-October/thread.html>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I would like to assure you that I share your concern about the
>> >> >> proper
>> >> >> process.
>> >> >
>> >> > Great, I hope that the Board follows the proper process. I'll stop
>> >> > making noise and allow the proper process to work.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Should I now conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board?
>> >>
>> >> Best regards, Eli
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Best regards, Eli
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Venka
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 10/12/2017 1:58 AM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi Eli,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I did it yesterday without having a ticket involved. My bad sorry.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I confirm that the CRO alias is now sending emails only to Vasile
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> me.
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Jorge Sanz
>> >> >> https://jorgesanz.net>> >> >>
>> >> >> Sent from my phone, excuse my brevity and typos
>> >> >>
>> >> >> El 11 oct. 2017 18:36, "Eli Adam" < [hidden email]> escribió:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Fenoy Gerald
>> >> >> < [hidden email]>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Dear Eli,
>> >> >> as you may have notice, Jeff has stepped down from his position of
>> >> >>
>> >> >> co-CRO when accepting the Nicolas’ nomination [1].
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I didn't find that thread while scanning through the archive.
>> >> >> Thanks
>> >> >> for pointing it out to me.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Jeff was involved in the charter member election process as co-CRO
>> >> >> but
>> >> >>
>> >> >> he is no more so, I guess, there is no issue for the board election.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Was the [hidden email] email alias updated? I didn't notice a ticket
>> >> >> for that. I'm impressed that there is so little concern about the
>> >> >> proper process. The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>> >> >> their last meeting,
>> >> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it
>> >> >> is
>> >> >> of no concern to the Board.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best regards, Eli
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best regards,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> [1]
>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-October/036449.html>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Gérald Fenoy
>> >> >> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay>> >> >>
>> >> >> Le 11 oct. 2017 à 16:04, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> a écrit :
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Nicolas,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, nicolas bozon
>> >> >> < [hidden email]>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is my honor to nominate Jeff McKenna for the OSGeo Board of
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Directors
>> >> >>
>> >> >> election.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO accept
>> >> >> your nomination,
>> >> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>> >> >> In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>> >> >> remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Most of you knows Jeff's energy and passion for everything OSGeo,
>> >> >> and i
>> >> >> would probably be mistaken trying to summarize his countless
>> >> >>
>> >> >> contributions
>> >> >>
>> >> >> over the years, at every level of our Foundation. His leadership and
>> >> >>
>> >> >> long
>> >> >>
>> >> >> involvement in the OSGeo and FOSS4G communities made him the Winner
>> >> >> of
>> >> >>
>> >> >> the
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Solz Katz Award in 2016, and i cannot add more. For those of you who
>> >> >>
>> >> >> may
>> >> >>
>> >> >> really not know Jeff yet, the User:Jeff_McKenna wiki page is a good
>> >> >>
>> >> >> read
>> >> >>
>> >> >> before you vote.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Jeff already served three times at the board and has a deep
>> >> >>
>> >> >> understanding of
>> >> >>
>> >> >> both the director role and the current OSGeo strategic plan.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Experienced
>> >> >>
>> >> >> with OSGeo governance and bylaws, Jeff also knows a lot about
>> >> >> projects
>> >> >>
>> >> >> and
>> >> >>
>> >> >> people. He is always ready to help build locally and to represent
>> >> >>
>> >> >> globally.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Jeff is a great communicator and enthusiastic community leader, and
>> >> >> i
>> >> >> believe he will be an excellent OSGeo director again. Please let us
>> >> >> all
>> >> >> welcome Jeff back at the Board!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best regards,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Nicolas Bozon
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >> Jeff McKenna agreed to be nominated and i decided to send the
>> >> >>
>> >> >> nomination
>> >> >>
>> >> >> directly to the Discuss list with cc to CRO, so it avoids Jeff to
>> >> >>
>> >> >> confirm to
>> >> >>
>> >> >> himself that he accepts the nomination. The Board Nominations page
>> >> >>
>> >> >> still
>> >> >>
>> >> >> need to be updated, could you please Vasile ? Sorry for shortening
>> >> >> the
>> >> >> nomination process in this special case.
>> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The point is not to avoid Jeff confirming to himself that he accepts
>> >> >> the nomination, it is to avoid the CRO running an election and
>> >> >> counting votes when they are also standing for election. It is
>> >> >> really
>> >> >> the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that this situation
>> >> >> doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who might accept a
>> >> >> nomination and people who might accept a nomination should not
>> >> >> accept
>> >> >> appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the tradition of the
>> >> >> CRO being a sitting Board member with a year remaining on their
>> >> >> term.
>> >> >> CRO is a difficult job and much credit to those who do it. Also,
>> >> >> someone (other than me) should be paying attention to the basic
>> >> >> process and raise these issues.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best regards, Eli
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >> [hidden email]
>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >> [hidden email]
>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >> [hidden email]
>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >> [hidden email]
>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> [hidden email]
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jorge Sanz
>> > http://www.osgeo.org>> > http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Michael Smith
< [hidden email]> wrote:
> Frankly, as a current board member, from what I’ve seen, everything was
> properly followed. As soon as he was nominated, Jeff stepped down as co CRO.
> It was all above board and transparent.
>
So then perhaps I'm correct in concluding, in the absence of any Board
action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination, I am left
to conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board.
In my opinion, it would be worth the Board deliberating and taking a
position. This goes back to my initial comment:
I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO accept
your nomination, https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
In my evaluation, the person offering the nomination failed in that
they not only did not follow the process but also nominated the CRO.
The CRO failed in that they accepted the position of CRO while there
was a possibility that they would run. The CRO also failed in that
they then accepted a nomination. And really it is the Board's failure
in my opinion:
It is really the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that
this situation doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who
might accept a nomination and people who might accept a nomination
should not accept appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the
tradition of the CRO being a sitting Board member with a year
remaining on their term. CRO is a difficult job and much credit to
those who do it.
But these are just my opinions. But I think that I am now correct in
concluding, in the absence of any Board action on the legitimacy of
the CRO accepting a nomination, this issue is of no concern to the
Board.
Best regards, Eli
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 18, 2017, at 1:19 PM, Jody Garnett < [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Eli the board did not deliberate, you can see the board email list. I have
> been glad for individual such as yourself caring, speaking up, and hopefully
> attending the next board meeting.
>
> I think we have all learned a lot this election period, and cannot thank the
> cro enough for keeping up.
>
> I trust the next board meeting will provide an update from the cro and an
> opportunity for discussion. The board is in a strange situation during
> elections, handing over control of the process to the CRO, and with 1/2 the
> participants at the end of their term. If you track the most recent board
> meetings several items have been deferred to the next board, so I understand
> the board not feeling able to deliberate in the middle of elections.
>
> It is also important to trust the CRO to act in good faith on behalf of our
> organization. I did speak up when I was concerned that member list had not
> been updated and would interfere in the CRO performing their task - but that
> was it.
>
> This is a hard lesson to learn, when to deliberate and when to encourage.
> Many of the deliberations about foss4g affordability were left until the
> Boston F2F meeting, to avoid distracting from the excellent work being done
> by the BLOC. If if well intentioned, deliberating during the course of an
> activity can distract contributors and bring out feelings of "why bother". I
> think this was the bickering referenced during the candidates debate
> yesterday.
>
> Finally as a candidate in this election I could not see a clear way to
> deliberate the current election that would not be viewed as a personal
> attack, or dismissed as campaigning.
>
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 18 October 2017 at 10:23, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Jorge Sanz < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > HI Eli,
>> >
>> > If I recall correctly, we answered you that Jeff immediately resigned
>> > from
>> > his position as CRO and he has not been involved at all in any Board
>> > elections CRO activity so everything is correctly handled except (and we
>> > apologized for that) the lack of a Trac ticket for the alias change.
>>
>> Thanks Jorge. I know those are the events that happened, however, I
>> never saw the Board deliberate and consider whether that is acceptable
>> or not. In my opinion, it is not, however I'm not on the Board, nor
>> is one Director's opinion a position of the Board. In the absence of
>> any Board action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>> I was left to conclude "that this issue is of no concern to the
>> Board."
>>
>> Has the Board deliberated or considered this? Did they take a position?
>>
>> The reason to have a process and follow it even when you maybe don't
>> "need" it, is so that you also follow the process when you *do* need
>> it.
>>
>> Best regards, Eli
>>
>> >
>> > Kind regards
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 18 October 2017 at 18:07, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Venka, all,
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Eli Adam < [hidden email]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hi Venka,
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan
>> >> > < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> >> Hi Eli,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> First of all, thanks to Jorge for volunteering to be co-CRO
>> >> >> and fixing the CRO alias promptly.
>> >> >
>> >> > Yes, thanks Jorge.
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Regarding your other comment reproduced below;
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>> >> >> their last meeting,
>> >> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it
>> >> >> is
>> >> >> of no concern to the Board.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The question of review this topic at the 2017-10-05 board meeting
>> >> >> did
>> >> >> not
>> >> >> arise
>> >> >> as the nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-08.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for fixing my mistake, I misunderstood the dates and thought
>> >> > that nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-01. Sorry to
>> >> > suggest that it was of no concern to the Board when it is actually
>> >> > unknown.
>> >>
>> >> It appears that voting has now started and I don't see any Board
>> >> threads on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2017-October/thread.html>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I would like to assure you that I share your concern about the
>> >> >> proper
>> >> >> process.
>> >> >
>> >> > Great, I hope that the Board follows the proper process. I'll stop
>> >> > making noise and allow the proper process to work.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Should I now conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board?
>> >>
>> >> Best regards, Eli
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Best regards, Eli
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Venka
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 10/12/2017 1:58 AM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi Eli,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I did it yesterday without having a ticket involved. My bad sorry.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I confirm that the CRO alias is now sending emails only to Vasile
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> me.
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Jorge Sanz
>> >> >> https://jorgesanz.net>> >> >>
>> >> >> Sent from my phone, excuse my brevity and typos
>> >> >>
>> >> >> El 11 oct. 2017 18:36, "Eli Adam" < [hidden email]> escribió:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Fenoy Gerald
>> >> >> < [hidden email]>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Dear Eli,
>> >> >> as you may have notice, Jeff has stepped down from his position of
>> >> >>
>> >> >> co-CRO when accepting the Nicolas’ nomination [1].
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I didn't find that thread while scanning through the archive.
>> >> >> Thanks
>> >> >> for pointing it out to me.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Jeff was involved in the charter member election process as co-CRO
>> >> >> but
>> >> >>
>> >> >> he is no more so, I guess, there is no issue for the board election.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Was the [hidden email] email alias updated? I didn't notice a ticket
>> >> >> for that. I'm impressed that there is so little concern about the
>> >> >> proper process. The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>> >> >> their last meeting,
>> >> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it
>> >> >> is
>> >> >> of no concern to the Board.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best regards, Eli
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best regards,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> [1]
>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-October/036449.html>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Gérald Fenoy
>> >> >> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay>> >> >>
>> >> >> Le 11 oct. 2017 à 16:04, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> a écrit :
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Nicolas,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, nicolas bozon
>> >> >> < [hidden email]>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is my honor to nominate Jeff McKenna for the OSGeo Board of
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Directors
>> >> >>
>> >> >> election.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO accept
>> >> >> your nomination,
>> >> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>> >> >> In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>> >> >> remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Most of you knows Jeff's energy and passion for everything OSGeo,
>> >> >> and i
>> >> >> would probably be mistaken trying to summarize his countless
>> >> >>
>> >> >> contributions
>> >> >>
>> >> >> over the years, at every level of our Foundation. His leadership and
>> >> >>
>> >> >> long
>> >> >>
>> >> >> involvement in the OSGeo and FOSS4G communities made him the Winner
>> >> >> of
>> >> >>
>> >> >> the
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Solz Katz Award in 2016, and i cannot add more. For those of you who
>> >> >>
>> >> >> may
>> >> >>
>> >> >> really not know Jeff yet, the User:Jeff_McKenna wiki page is a good
>> >> >>
>> >> >> read
>> >> >>
>> >> >> before you vote.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Jeff already served three times at the board and has a deep
>> >> >>
>> >> >> understanding of
>> >> >>
>> >> >> both the director role and the current OSGeo strategic plan.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Experienced
>> >> >>
>> >> >> with OSGeo governance and bylaws, Jeff also knows a lot about
>> >> >> projects
>> >> >>
>> >> >> and
>> >> >>
>> >> >> people. He is always ready to help build locally and to represent
>> >> >>
>> >> >> globally.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Jeff is a great communicator and enthusiastic community leader, and
>> >> >> i
>> >> >> believe he will be an excellent OSGeo director again. Please let us
>> >> >> all
>> >> >> welcome Jeff back at the Board!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best regards,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Nicolas Bozon
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >> Jeff McKenna agreed to be nominated and i decided to send the
>> >> >>
>> >> >> nomination
>> >> >>
>> >> >> directly to the Discuss list with cc to CRO, so it avoids Jeff to
>> >> >>
>> >> >> confirm to
>> >> >>
>> >> >> himself that he accepts the nomination. The Board Nominations page
>> >> >>
>> >> >> still
>> >> >>
>> >> >> need to be updated, could you please Vasile ? Sorry for shortening
>> >> >> the
>> >> >> nomination process in this special case.
>> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The point is not to avoid Jeff confirming to himself that he accepts
>> >> >> the nomination, it is to avoid the CRO running an election and
>> >> >> counting votes when they are also standing for election. It is
>> >> >> really
>> >> >> the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that this situation
>> >> >> doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who might accept a
>> >> >> nomination and people who might accept a nomination should not
>> >> >> accept
>> >> >> appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the tradition of the
>> >> >> CRO being a sitting Board member with a year remaining on their
>> >> >> term.
>> >> >> CRO is a difficult job and much credit to those who do it. Also,
>> >> >> someone (other than me) should be paying attention to the basic
>> >> >> process and raise these issues.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best regards, Eli
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >> [hidden email]
>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >> [hidden email]
>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >> [hidden email]
>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >> [hidden email]
>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> [hidden email]
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jorge Sanz
>> > http://www.osgeo.org>> > http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
What it says is that "The CRO is not eligible for election to the board
while serving as CRO". And that was followed. It doesn't say anything
about being nominated. Resigning from the position, allows Jeff to accept
the nomination. I'm not speaking for the board, just for myself. But in my
opinion, proper procedure was followed.
Mike
Michael Smith
OSGeo Foundation Treasurer
[hidden email]
-----Original Message-----
From: Eli Adam < [hidden email]>
Reply-To: < [hidden email]>
Date: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 3:26 PM
To: Michael Smith < [hidden email]>
Cc: Jody Garnett < [hidden email]>, OSGeo Discussions
< [hidden email]>, CRO < [hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fwd: Board nomination: Jeff McKenna
>On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Michael Smith
>< [hidden email]> wrote:
>> Frankly, as a current board member, from what I¹ve seen, everything was
>> properly followed. As soon as he was nominated, Jeff stepped down as co
>>CRO.
>> It was all above board and transparent.
>>
>
>So then perhaps I'm correct in concluding, in the absence of any Board
>action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination, I am left
>to conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board.
>
>In my opinion, it would be worth the Board deliberating and taking a
>position. This goes back to my initial comment:
>
>I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO accept
>your nomination, https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>
>In my evaluation, the person offering the nomination failed in that
>they not only did not follow the process but also nominated the CRO.
>The CRO failed in that they accepted the position of CRO while there
>was a possibility that they would run. The CRO also failed in that
>they then accepted a nomination. And really it is the Board's failure
>in my opinion:
>
>It is really the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that
>this situation doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who
>might accept a nomination and people who might accept a nomination
>should not accept appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the
>tradition of the CRO being a sitting Board member with a year
>remaining on their term. CRO is a difficult job and much credit to
>those who do it.
>
>But these are just my opinions. But I think that I am now correct in
>concluding, in the absence of any Board action on the legitimacy of
>the CRO accepting a nomination, this issue is of no concern to the
>Board.
>
>Best regards, Eli
>
>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2017, at 1:19 PM, Jody Garnett < [hidden email]>
>>wrote:
>>
>> Eli the board did not deliberate, you can see the board email list. I
>>have
>> been glad for individual such as yourself caring, speaking up, and
>>hopefully
>> attending the next board meeting.
>>
>> I think we have all learned a lot this election period, and cannot
>>thank the
>> cro enough for keeping up.
>>
>> I trust the next board meeting will provide an update from the cro and
>>an
>> opportunity for discussion. The board is in a strange situation during
>> elections, handing over control of the process to the CRO, and with 1/2
>>the
>> participants at the end of their term. If you track the most recent
>>board
>> meetings several items have been deferred to the next board, so I
>>understand
>> the board not feeling able to deliberate in the middle of elections.
>>
>> It is also important to trust the CRO to act in good faith on behalf of
>>our
>> organization. I did speak up when I was concerned that member list had
>>not
>> been updated and would interfere in the CRO performing their task - but
>>that
>> was it.
>>
>> This is a hard lesson to learn, when to deliberate and when to
>>encourage.
>> Many of the deliberations about foss4g affordability were left until the
>> Boston F2F meeting, to avoid distracting from the excellent work being
>>done
>> by the BLOC. If if well intentioned, deliberating during the course of
>>an
>> activity can distract contributors and bring out feelings of "why
>>bother". I
>> think this was the bickering referenced during the candidates debate
>> yesterday.
>>
>> Finally as a candidate in this election I could not see a clear way to
>> deliberate the current election that would not be viewed as a personal
>> attack, or dismissed as campaigning.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 18 October 2017 at 10:23, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Jorge Sanz < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>> > HI Eli,
>>> >
>>> > If I recall correctly, we answered you that Jeff immediately resigned
>>> > from
>>> > his position as CRO and he has not been involved at all in any Board
>>> > elections CRO activity so everything is correctly handled except
>>>(and we
>>> > apologized for that) the lack of a Trac ticket for the alias change.
>>>
>>> Thanks Jorge. I know those are the events that happened, however, I
>>> never saw the Board deliberate and consider whether that is acceptable
>>> or not. In my opinion, it is not, however I'm not on the Board, nor
>>> is one Director's opinion a position of the Board. In the absence of
>>> any Board action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>>> I was left to conclude "that this issue is of no concern to the
>>> Board."
>>>
>>> Has the Board deliberated or considered this? Did they take a
>>>position?
>>>
>>> The reason to have a process and follow it even when you maybe don't
>>> "need" it, is so that you also follow the process when you *do* need
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Kind regards
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 18 October 2017 at 18:07, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Hi Venka, all,
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Eli Adam < [hidden email]>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> > Hi Venka,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan
>>> >> > < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >> >> Hi Eli,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> First of all, thanks to Jorge for volunteering to be co-CRO
>>> >> >> and fixing the CRO alias promptly.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Yes, thanks Jorge.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Regarding your other comment reproduced below;
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>>> >> >> their last meeting,
>>> >> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps
>>>it
>>> >> >> is
>>> >> >> of no concern to the Board.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> The question of review this topic at the 2017-10-05 board meeting
>>> >> >> did
>>> >> >> not
>>> >> >> arise
>>> >> >> as the nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-08.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Thanks for fixing my mistake, I misunderstood the dates and
>>>thought
>>> >> > that nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-01. Sorry
>>>to
>>> >> > suggest that it was of no concern to the Board when it is actually
>>> >> > unknown.
>>> >>
>>> >> It appears that voting has now started and I don't see any Board
>>> >> threads on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2017-October/thread.html>>> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I would like to assure you that I share your concern about the
>>> >> >> proper
>>> >> >> process.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Great, I hope that the Board follows the proper process. I'll
>>>stop
>>> >> > making noise and allow the proper process to work.
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Should I now conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board?
>>> >>
>>> >> Best regards, Eli
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> > Best regards, Eli
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Best
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Venka
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On 10/12/2017 1:58 AM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Hi Eli,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I did it yesterday without having a ticket involved. My bad
>>>sorry.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I confirm that the CRO alias is now sending emails only to Vasile
>>> >> >> and
>>> >> >> me.
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> Jorge Sanz
>>> >> >> https://jorgesanz.net>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Sent from my phone, excuse my brevity and typos
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> El 11 oct. 2017 18:36, "Eli Adam" < [hidden email]>
>>>escribió:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Fenoy Gerald
>>> >> >> < [hidden email]>
>>> >> >> wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Dear Eli,
>>> >> >> as you may have notice, Jeff has stepped down from his position
>>>of
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> co-CRO when accepting the Nicolas¹ nomination [1].
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I didn't find that thread while scanning through the archive.
>>> >> >> Thanks
>>> >> >> for pointing it out to me.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Jeff was involved in the charter member election process as
>>>co-CRO
>>> >> >> but
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> he is no more so, I guess, there is no issue for the board
>>>election.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Was the [hidden email] email alias updated? I didn't notice a
>>>ticket
>>> >> >> for that. I'm impressed that there is so little concern about
>>>the
>>> >> >> proper process. The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>>> >> >> their last meeting,
>>> >> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps
>>>it
>>> >> >> is
>>> >> >> of no concern to the Board.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Best regards, Eli
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Best regards,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> [1]
>>> >> >>
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-October/036449.html>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Gérald Fenoy
>>> >> >> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Le 11 oct. 2017 à 16:04, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> a
>>>écrit :
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Nicolas,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, nicolas bozon
>>> >> >> < [hidden email]>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> It is my honor to nominate Jeff McKenna for the OSGeo Board of
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Directors
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> election.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO
>>>accept
>>> >> >> your nomination,
>>> >> >> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>>> >> >> In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>>> >> >> remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Most of you knows Jeff's energy and passion for everything OSGeo,
>>> >> >> and i
>>> >> >> would probably be mistaken trying to summarize his countless
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> contributions
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> over the years, at every level of our Foundation. His leadership
>>>and
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> long
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> involvement in the OSGeo and FOSS4G communities made him the
>>>Winner
>>> >> >> of
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> the
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Solz Katz Award in 2016, and i cannot add more. For those of you
>>>who
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> may
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> really not know Jeff yet, the User:Jeff_McKenna wiki page is a
>>>good
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> read
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> before you vote.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Jeff already served three times at the board and has a deep
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> understanding of
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> both the director role and the current OSGeo strategic plan.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Experienced
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> with OSGeo governance and bylaws, Jeff also knows a lot about
>>> >> >> projects
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> and
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> people. He is always ready to help build locally and to represent
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> globally.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Jeff is a great communicator and enthusiastic community leader,
>>>and
>>> >> >> i
>>> >> >> believe he will be an excellent OSGeo director again. Please let
>>>us
>>> >> >> all
>>> >> >> welcome Jeff back at the Board!
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Best regards,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Nicolas Bozon
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >> Jeff McKenna agreed to be nominated and i decided to send the
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> nomination
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> directly to the Discuss list with cc to CRO, so it avoids Jeff to
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> confirm to
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> himself that he accepts the nomination. The Board Nominations
>>>page
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> still
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> need to be updated, could you please Vasile ? Sorry for
>>>shortening
>>> >> >> the
>>> >> >> nomination process in this special case.
>>> >> >>
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> The point is not to avoid Jeff confirming to himself that he
>>>accepts
>>> >> >> the nomination, it is to avoid the CRO running an election and
>>> >> >> counting votes when they are also standing for election. It is
>>> >> >> really
>>> >> >> the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that this
>>>situation
>>> >> >> doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who might
>>>accept a
>>> >> >> nomination and people who might accept a nomination should not
>>> >> >> accept
>>> >> >> appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the tradition of
>>>the
>>> >> >> CRO being a sitting Board member with a year remaining on their
>>> >> >> term.
>>> >> >> CRO is a difficult job and much credit to those who do it. Also,
>>> >> >> someone (other than me) should be paying attention to the basic
>>> >> >> process and raise these issues.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Best regards, Eli
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>>> >> >> [hidden email]
>>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>>> >> >> [hidden email]
>>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>>> >> >> [hidden email]
>>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> >> Discuss mailing list
>>> >> >> [hidden email]
>>> >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Discuss mailing list
>>> >> [hidden email]
>>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Jorge Sanz
>>> > http://www.osgeo.org>>> > http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
Hi Eli,
With the aim of addressing you concern, the date of
nomination and Jeff's involvement, as co-CRO, in the
election was verified. Both these points were
back to you via the discuss list.
My understanding was that the procedures were followed
and therefore I did not request for the matter to be deliberated
by the board. Also, none of the other board member had
requested for the matter to be deliberated by the board.
Rather than matter being of no concern to the board, I think
that the others in the present board were also of the same opinion
as that stated by Mike below, and hence no further discussion
on this matter was taken up by the board.
Best
Venka
On 10/19/2017 4:36 AM, Michael Smith wrote:
> What it says is that "The CRO is not eligible for election to the board
> while serving as CRO". And that was followed. It doesn't say anything
> about being nominated. Resigning from the position, allows Jeff to accept
> the nomination. I'm not speaking for the board, just for myself. But in my
> opinion, proper procedure was followed.
>
> Mike
>
> Michael Smith
> OSGeo Foundation Treasurer
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eli Adam < [hidden email]>
> Reply-To: < [hidden email]>
> Date: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 3:26 PM
> To: Michael Smith < [hidden email]>
> Cc: Jody Garnett < [hidden email]>, OSGeo Discussions
> < [hidden email]>, CRO < [hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fwd: Board nomination: Jeff McKenna
>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Michael Smith
>> < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Frankly, as a current board member, from what I¹ve seen, everything was
>>> properly followed. As soon as he was nominated, Jeff stepped down as co
>>> CRO.
>>> It was all above board and transparent.
>>>
>> So then perhaps I'm correct in concluding, in the absence of any Board
>> action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination, I am left
>> to conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board.
>>
>> In my opinion, it would be worth the Board deliberating and taking a
>> position. This goes back to my initial comment:
>>
>> I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO accept
>> your nomination, https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>> In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>> remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>>
>> In my evaluation, the person offering the nomination failed in that
>> they not only did not follow the process but also nominated the CRO.
>> The CRO failed in that they accepted the position of CRO while there
>> was a possibility that they would run. The CRO also failed in that
>> they then accepted a nomination. And really it is the Board's failure
>> in my opinion:
>>
>> It is really the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that
>> this situation doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who
>> might accept a nomination and people who might accept a nomination
>> should not accept appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the
>> tradition of the CRO being a sitting Board member with a year
>> remaining on their term. CRO is a difficult job and much credit to
>> those who do it.
>>
>> But these are just my opinions. But I think that I am now correct in
>> concluding, in the absence of any Board action on the legitimacy of
>> the CRO accepting a nomination, this issue is of no concern to the
>> Board.
>>
>> Best regards, Eli
>>
>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Oct 18, 2017, at 1:19 PM, Jody Garnett < [hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Eli the board did not deliberate, you can see the board email list. I
>>> have
>>> been glad for individual such as yourself caring, speaking up, and
>>> hopefully
>>> attending the next board meeting.
>>>
>>> I think we have all learned a lot this election period, and cannot
>>> thank the
>>> cro enough for keeping up.
>>>
>>> I trust the next board meeting will provide an update from the cro and
>>> an
>>> opportunity for discussion. The board is in a strange situation during
>>> elections, handing over control of the process to the CRO, and with 1/2
>>> the
>>> participants at the end of their term. If you track the most recent
>>> board
>>> meetings several items have been deferred to the next board, so I
>>> understand
>>> the board not feeling able to deliberate in the middle of elections.
>>>
>>> It is also important to trust the CRO to act in good faith on behalf of
>>> our
>>> organization. I did speak up when I was concerned that member list had
>>> not
>>> been updated and would interfere in the CRO performing their task - but
>>> that
>>> was it.
>>>
>>> This is a hard lesson to learn, when to deliberate and when to
>>> encourage.
>>> Many of the deliberations about foss4g affordability were left until the
>>> Boston F2F meeting, to avoid distracting from the excellent work being
>>> done
>>> by the BLOC. If if well intentioned, deliberating during the course of
>>> an
>>> activity can distract contributors and bring out feelings of "why
>>> bother". I
>>> think this was the bickering referenced during the candidates debate
>>> yesterday.
>>>
>>> Finally as a candidate in this election I could not see a clear way to
>>> deliberate the current election that would not be viewed as a personal
>>> attack, or dismissed as campaigning.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>> On 18 October 2017 at 10:23, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Jorge Sanz < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> HI Eli,
>>>>>
>>>>> If I recall correctly, we answered you that Jeff immediately resigned
>>>>> from
>>>>> his position as CRO and he has not been involved at all in any Board
>>>>> elections CRO activity so everything is correctly handled except
>>>> (and we
>>>>> apologized for that) the lack of a Trac ticket for the alias change.
>>>> Thanks Jorge. I know those are the events that happened, however, I
>>>> never saw the Board deliberate and consider whether that is acceptable
>>>> or not. In my opinion, it is not, however I'm not on the Board, nor
>>>> is one Director's opinion a position of the Board. In the absence of
>>>> any Board action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>>>> I was left to conclude "that this issue is of no concern to the
>>>> Board."
>>>>
>>>> Has the Board deliberated or considered this? Did they take a
>>>> position?
>>>>
>>>> The reason to have a process and follow it even when you maybe don't
>>>> "need" it, is so that you also follow the process when you *do* need
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 18 October 2017 at 18:07, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Venka, all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Eli Adam < [hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Venka,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan
>>>>>>> < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Eli,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> First of all, thanks to Jorge for volunteering to be co-CRO
>>>>>>>> and fixing the CRO alias promptly.
>>>>>>> Yes, thanks Jorge.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regarding your other comment reproduced below;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>>>>>>>> their last meeting,
>>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps
>>>> it
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> of no concern to the Board.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The question of review this topic at the 2017-10-05 board meeting
>>>>>>>> did
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> arise
>>>>>>>> as the nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-08.
>>>>>>> Thanks for fixing my mistake, I misunderstood the dates and
>>>> thought
>>>>>>> that nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-01. Sorry
>>>> to
>>>>>>> suggest that it was of no concern to the Board when it is actually
>>>>>>> unknown.
>>>>>> It appears that voting has now started and I don't see any Board
>>>>>> threads on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2017-October/thread.html>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would like to assure you that I share your concern about the
>>>>>>>> proper
>>>>>>>> process.
>>>>>>> Great, I hope that the Board follows the proper process. I'll
>>>> stop
>>>>>>> making noise and allow the proper process to work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should I now conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Venka
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/12/2017 1:58 AM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Eli,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I did it yesterday without having a ticket involved. My bad
>>>> sorry.
>>>>>>>> I confirm that the CRO alias is now sending emails only to Vasile
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Jorge Sanz
>>>>>>>> https://jorgesanz.net>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my phone, excuse my brevity and typos
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> El 11 oct. 2017 18:36, "Eli Adam" < [hidden email]>
>>>> escribió:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Fenoy Gerald
>>>>>>>> < [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dear Eli,
>>>>>>>> as you may have notice, Jeff has stepped down from his position
>>>> of
>>>>>>>> co-CRO when accepting the Nicolas¹ nomination [1].
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I didn't find that thread while scanning through the archive.
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>> for pointing it out to me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeff was involved in the charter member election process as
>>>> co-CRO
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> he is no more so, I guess, there is no issue for the board
>>>> election.
>>>>>>>> Was the [hidden email] email alias updated? I didn't notice a
>>>> ticket
>>>>>>>> for that. I'm impressed that there is so little concern about
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> proper process. The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>>>>>>>> their last meeting,
>>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps
>>>> it
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> of no concern to the Board.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-October/036449.html>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Gérald Fenoy
>>>>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Le 11 oct. 2017 à 16:04, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> a
>>>> écrit :
>>>>>>>> Nicolas,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, nicolas bozon
>>>>>>>> < [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is my honor to nominate Jeff McKenna for the OSGeo Board of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Directors
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> election.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO
>>>> accept
>>>>>>>> your nomination,
>>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>>>>>>>> In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>>>>>>>> remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Most of you knows Jeff's energy and passion for everything OSGeo,
>>>>>>>> and i
>>>>>>>> would probably be mistaken trying to summarize his countless
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> contributions
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> over the years, at every level of our Foundation. His leadership
>>>> and
>>>>>>>> long
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> involvement in the OSGeo and FOSS4G communities made him the
>>>> Winner
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Solz Katz Award in 2016, and i cannot add more. For those of you
>>>> who
>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> really not know Jeff yet, the User:Jeff_McKenna wiki page is a
>>>> good
>>>>>>>> read
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> before you vote.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeff already served three times at the board and has a deep
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> understanding of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> both the director role and the current OSGeo strategic plan.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Experienced
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> with OSGeo governance and bylaws, Jeff also knows a lot about
>>>>>>>> projects
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> people. He is always ready to help build locally and to represent
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> globally.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeff is a great communicator and enthusiastic community leader,
>>>> and
>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>> believe he will be an excellent OSGeo director again. Please let
>>>> us
>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>> welcome Jeff back at the Board!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nicolas Bozon
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Jeff McKenna agreed to be nominated and i decided to send the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> nomination
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> directly to the Discuss list with cc to CRO, so it avoids Jeff to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> confirm to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> himself that he accepts the nomination. The Board Nominations
>>>> page
>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> need to be updated, could you please Vasile ? Sorry for
>>>> shortening
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> nomination process in this special case.
>>>>>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> The point is not to avoid Jeff confirming to himself that he
>>>> accepts
>>>>>>>> the nomination, it is to avoid the CRO running an election and
>>>>>>>> counting votes when they are also standing for election. It is
>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>> the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that this
>>>> situation
>>>>>>>> doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who might
>>>> accept a
>>>>>>>> nomination and people who might accept a nomination should not
>>>>>>>> accept
>>>>>>>> appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the tradition of
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> CRO being a sitting Board member with a year remaining on their
>>>>>>>> term.
>>>>>>>> CRO is a difficult job and much credit to those who do it. Also,
>>>>>>>> someone (other than me) should be paying attention to the basic
>>>>>>>> process and raise these issues.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jorge Sanz
>>>>> http://www.osgeo.org>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
Dear Eli,
I appreciate your concerns related to OSGeo board elections. However, I
have a few points to make. This year we had 2 CRO people, not just one.
In your message on this topic you always make it sound like the CRO
ended up in a conflict position and this is not entirely true. Actually,
during the board meeting when the CRO position was decided I was the one
stepping up for this role. During that meeting Jeff was invited to
manage this year Sol Katz award so he was also present. Next topic item
was the CRO, the moment when Jeff offered his help for CRO, as he did in
most of the previous years. The log is available at [1]. The board
motion was to have two CRO for elections. And Jeff did an wonderful job
during the new charter members nomination process. Then, Jeff stepped
down immediately after his nomination for the board members elections.
He never had access to the electronic voting system (that was setup a
week later) and his access to [hidden email] email was cutoff a few hours
later. Personally I share your position that a CRO should not be in the
situation to be nominated for a position in the elections that he/she is
managing. However, in this case, OSGeo had the position covered and the
changes were done transparently. I know for a fact that Jeff din not
think about a nomination when offered his help. It happen and he resign
from his position to remove the conflict. At that moment I have asked
Jorge for help for technical problems (not as co-CRO as this should
require board acceptance and the time was short). All this elections
discussions, starting with Jeff resignation, were performed through CRO
email alias and I can make that public if any concerns regarding the
impartiality/transparency of the elections are raised by you or by
anyone else.
Best,
Vasile
CRO 2017
[1] http://irclogs.geoapt.com/osgeo/%23osgeo.2017-04-12.logOn 10/18/17 10:15 PM, Eli Adam wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Jody Garnett < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> Eli the board did not deliberate, you can see the board email list. I have
>> been glad for individual such as yourself caring, speaking up, and hopefully
>> attending the next board meeting.
>>
>
> I thought that this issue might have been of enough concern for the
> Board to deliberate it. Indeed, I thought that Venka's earlier
> comment was an indication that that might happen.
>
>
>> I think we have all learned a lot this election period, and cannot thank the
>> cro enough for keeping up.
>>
>
> CRO is a very large and difficult job. Yes, great thanks to the CROs.
>
>> I trust the next board meeting will provide an update from the cro and an
>> opportunity for discussion. The board is in a strange situation during
>> elections, handing over control of the process to the CRO, and with 1/2 the
>> participants at the end of their term. If you track the most recent board
>> meetings several items have been deferred to the next board, so I understand
>> the board not feeling able to deliberate in the middle of elections.
>>
>
> Yes, the Board appoints the CRO(s) to run the elections for them.
> While the Board can defer some things to future Boards (especially
> future looking things), the Board is responsible for anything that
> arises while they are on duty.
>
>> It is also important to trust the CRO to act in good faith on behalf of our
>> organization. I did speak up when I was concerned that member list had not
>> been updated and would interfere in the CRO performing their task - but that
>> was it.
>>
>
> I largely believe that once a task is delegated, that person has the
> latitude to act. In this case, I would have thought it was worth
> deliberation and consultation with the CRO on how they want to run
> elections that don't go exactly following the process.
>
>> This is a hard lesson to learn, when to deliberate and when to encourage.
>> Many of the deliberations about foss4g affordability were left until the
>> Boston F2F meeting, to avoid distracting from the excellent work being done
>> by the BLOC. If if well intentioned, deliberating during the course of an
>> activity can distract contributors and bring out feelings of "why bother". I
>> think this was the bickering referenced during the candidates debate
>> yesterday.
>>
>> Finally as a candidate in this election I could not see a clear way to
>> deliberate the current election that would not be viewed as a personal
>> attack, or dismissed as campaigning.
>>
>
> This seems rather straight forward. For the Board to deliberate this
> manner fairly, directors like you who are running for reelection would
> be obligated to show up for quorum and abstain from discussion and
> voting. The issue would be decided by the portion of the Board with
> their term running until 2018 and those who are not running for
> reelection. But yes, I do see how you personally would be hampered
> from really engaging this topic.
>
> Best regards, Eli
>
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 18 October 2017 at 10:23, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Jorge Sanz < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> HI Eli,
>>>>
>>>> If I recall correctly, we answered you that Jeff immediately resigned
>>>> from
>>>> his position as CRO and he has not been involved at all in any Board
>>>> elections CRO activity so everything is correctly handled except (and we
>>>> apologized for that) the lack of a Trac ticket for the alias change.
>>>
>>> Thanks Jorge. I know those are the events that happened, however, I
>>> never saw the Board deliberate and consider whether that is acceptable
>>> or not. In my opinion, it is not, however I'm not on the Board, nor
>>> is one Director's opinion a position of the Board. In the absence of
>>> any Board action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>>> I was left to conclude "that this issue is of no concern to the
>>> Board."
>>>
>>> Has the Board deliberated or considered this? Did they take a position?
>>>
>>> The reason to have a process and follow it even when you maybe don't
>>> "need" it, is so that you also follow the process when you *do* need
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 18 October 2017 at 18:07, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Venka, all,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Eli Adam < [hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Venka,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan
>>>>>> < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Eli,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First of all, thanks to Jorge for volunteering to be co-CRO
>>>>>>> and fixing the CRO alias promptly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, thanks Jorge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regarding your other comment reproduced below;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>>>>>>> their last meeting,
>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> of no concern to the Board.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The question of review this topic at the 2017-10-05 board meeting
>>>>>>> did
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> arise
>>>>>>> as the nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-08.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for fixing my mistake, I misunderstood the dates and thought
>>>>>> that nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-01. Sorry to
>>>>>> suggest that it was of no concern to the Board when it is actually
>>>>>> unknown.
>>>>>
>>>>> It appears that voting has now started and I don't see any Board
>>>>> threads on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2017-October/thread.html>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would like to assure you that I share your concern about the
>>>>>>> proper
>>>>>>> process.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Great, I hope that the Board follows the proper process. I'll stop
>>>>>> making noise and allow the proper process to work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Should I now conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Venka
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/12/2017 1:58 AM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Eli,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did it yesterday without having a ticket involved. My bad sorry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I confirm that the CRO alias is now sending emails only to Vasile
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jorge Sanz
>>>>>>> https://jorgesanz.net>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my phone, excuse my brevity and typos
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> El 11 oct. 2017 18:36, "Eli Adam" < [hidden email]> escribió:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Fenoy Gerald
>>>>>>> < [hidden email]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear Eli,
>>>>>>> as you may have notice, Jeff has stepped down from his position of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> co-CRO when accepting the Nicolas’ nomination [1].
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I didn't find that thread while scanning through the archive.
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> for pointing it out to me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jeff was involved in the charter member election process as co-CRO
>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> he is no more so, I guess, there is no issue for the board election.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Was the [hidden email] email alias updated? I didn't notice a ticket
>>>>>>> for that. I'm impressed that there is so little concern about the
>>>>>>> proper process. The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>>>>>>> their last meeting,
>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> of no concern to the Board.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-October/036449.html>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gérald Fenoy
>>>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 11 oct. 2017 à 16:04, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> a écrit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nicolas,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, nicolas bozon
>>>>>>> < [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is my honor to nominate Jeff McKenna for the OSGeo Board of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Directors
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> election.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO accept
>>>>>>> your nomination,
>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>>>>>>> In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>>>>>>> remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most of you knows Jeff's energy and passion for everything OSGeo,
>>>>>>> and i
>>>>>>> would probably be mistaken trying to summarize his countless
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> contributions
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> over the years, at every level of our Foundation. His leadership and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> long
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> involvement in the OSGeo and FOSS4G communities made him the Winner
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Solz Katz Award in 2016, and i cannot add more. For those of you who
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> really not know Jeff yet, the User:Jeff_McKenna wiki page is a good
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> read
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> before you vote.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jeff already served three times at the board and has a deep
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> understanding of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> both the director role and the current OSGeo strategic plan.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Experienced
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> with OSGeo governance and bylaws, Jeff also knows a lot about
>>>>>>> projects
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> people. He is always ready to help build locally and to represent
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> globally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jeff is a great communicator and enthusiastic community leader, and
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>> believe he will be an excellent OSGeo director again. Please let us
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>> welcome Jeff back at the Board!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nicolas Bozon
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Jeff McKenna agreed to be nominated and i decided to send the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> nomination
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> directly to the Discuss list with cc to CRO, so it avoids Jeff to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> confirm to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> himself that he accepts the nomination. The Board Nominations page
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> need to be updated, could you please Vasile ? Sorry for shortening
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> nomination process in this special case.
>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The point is not to avoid Jeff confirming to himself that he accepts
>>>>>>> the nomination, it is to avoid the CRO running an election and
>>>>>>> counting votes when they are also standing for election. It is
>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>> the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that this situation
>>>>>>> doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who might accept a
>>>>>>> nomination and people who might accept a nomination should not
>>>>>>> accept
>>>>>>> appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the tradition of the
>>>>>>> CRO being a sitting Board member with a year remaining on their
>>>>>>> term.
>>>>>>> CRO is a difficult job and much credit to those who do it. Also,
>>>>>>> someone (other than me) should be paying attention to the basic
>>>>>>> process and raise these issues.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jorge Sanz
>>>> http://www.osgeo.org>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Vasile Crăciunescu
geo-spatial.org: An elegant place for sharing geoKnowledge & geoData
http://www.geo-spatial.orghttp://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/geo-spatial_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
|
|
Hi Vasile,
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Vasile Craciunescu
< [hidden email]> wrote:
> Dear Eli,
>
> I appreciate your concerns related to OSGeo board elections. However, I have
> a few points to make. This year we had 2 CRO people, not just one. In your
> message on this topic you always make it sound like the CRO ended up in a
> conflict position and this is not entirely true. Actually, during the board
Correct, only Jeff in his role as CRO was a conflict of interest and
(in my opinion) violation of the procedure. If you were not also a
CRO, then this truly would have been a governance crisis and lack any
shred of legitimacy. It looks like you noted that you were a good
selection as your term runs for another year. CROs used to always be
board members with another year remaining on their term thus making
nomination of the CRO impossible.
You've done a great job Vasile and none of your actions or work are
clouded by conflict of interest or violation of procedure.
> meeting when the CRO position was decided I was the one stepping up for this
> role. During that meeting Jeff was invited to manage this year Sol Katz
> award so he was also present. Next topic item was the CRO, the moment when
> Jeff offered his help for CRO, as he did in most of the previous years. The
> log is available at [1]. The board motion was to have two CRO for elections.
> And Jeff did an wonderful job during the new charter members nomination
> process. Then, Jeff stepped down immediately after his nomination for the
> board members elections. He never had access to the electronic voting system
> (that was setup a week later) and his access to [hidden email] email was
> cutoff a few hours later. Personally I share your position that a CRO should
> not be in the situation to be nominated for a position in the elections that
One way to handle that would have been to not accept the nomination
since it did not follow procedure of where to send the nomination and
it was also a nomination of (one of) the CROs which is an additional
violation of procedure. The Board also could have prevented this
possibility by not appointing a CRO who was able to accept a
nomination.
As you know, the CRO is a position of much work and responsibility and
also privy to lots of information that comes through to the CRO email
alias (you for instance know people who may have been nominated and
declined the nomination). Being in that position in any portion of
the election process is more than enough to disqualify someone in my
opinion.
> he/she is managing. However, in this case, OSGeo had the position covered
> and the changes were done transparently. I know for a fact that Jeff din not
> think about a nomination when offered his help. It happen and he resign from
> his position to remove the conflict. At that moment I have asked Jorge for
> help for technical problems (not as co-CRO as this should require board
> acceptance and the time was short). All this elections discussions, starting
> with Jeff resignation, were performed through CRO email alias and I can make
> that public if any concerns regarding the impartiality/transparency of the
> elections are raised by you or by anyone else.
>
> Best,
> Vasile
> CRO 2017
In any case Vasile, you've done a great amount of work and continue to
do a good job. It is clear that the Board sees this as a non-issue in
which case they've done their job. We elect the Board to act (or not
act) on these issues and we have to live with the Board's actions (or
inactions). In my opinion, it is not a legitimate election and such
loss of the rule of law in OSGeo could lead to trouble eventually.
Thanks for all your tireless work in this job.
Sorry to everyone on this list having to listen to yet another thread.
Hopefully we can return to our mostly productive work in the various
realms of OSGeo.
Best regards, Eli
>
>
> [1] http://irclogs.geoapt.com/osgeo/%23osgeo.2017-04-12.log>
>
>
> On 10/18/17 10:15 PM, Eli Adam wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Jody Garnett < [hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Eli the board did not deliberate, you can see the board email list. I
>>> have
>>> been glad for individual such as yourself caring, speaking up, and
>>> hopefully
>>> attending the next board meeting.
>>>
>>
>> I thought that this issue might have been of enough concern for the
>> Board to deliberate it. Indeed, I thought that Venka's earlier
>> comment was an indication that that might happen.
>>
>>
>>> I think we have all learned a lot this election period, and cannot thank
>>> the
>>> cro enough for keeping up.
>>>
>>
>> CRO is a very large and difficult job. Yes, great thanks to the CROs.
>>
>>> I trust the next board meeting will provide an update from the cro and an
>>> opportunity for discussion. The board is in a strange situation during
>>> elections, handing over control of the process to the CRO, and with 1/2
>>> the
>>> participants at the end of their term. If you track the most recent board
>>> meetings several items have been deferred to the next board, so I
>>> understand
>>> the board not feeling able to deliberate in the middle of elections.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, the Board appoints the CRO(s) to run the elections for them.
>> While the Board can defer some things to future Boards (especially
>> future looking things), the Board is responsible for anything that
>> arises while they are on duty.
>>
>>> It is also important to trust the CRO to act in good faith on behalf of
>>> our
>>> organization. I did speak up when I was concerned that member list had
>>> not
>>> been updated and would interfere in the CRO performing their task - but
>>> that
>>> was it.
>>>
>>
>> I largely believe that once a task is delegated, that person has the
>> latitude to act. In this case, I would have thought it was worth
>> deliberation and consultation with the CRO on how they want to run
>> elections that don't go exactly following the process.
>>
>>> This is a hard lesson to learn, when to deliberate and when to encourage.
>>> Many of the deliberations about foss4g affordability were left until the
>>> Boston F2F meeting, to avoid distracting from the excellent work being
>>> done
>>> by the BLOC. If if well intentioned, deliberating during the course of an
>>> activity can distract contributors and bring out feelings of "why
>>> bother". I
>>> think this was the bickering referenced during the candidates debate
>>> yesterday.
>>>
>>> Finally as a candidate in this election I could not see a clear way to
>>> deliberate the current election that would not be viewed as a personal
>>> attack, or dismissed as campaigning.
>>>
>>
>> This seems rather straight forward. For the Board to deliberate this
>> manner fairly, directors like you who are running for reelection would
>> be obligated to show up for quorum and abstain from discussion and
>> voting. The issue would be decided by the portion of the Board with
>> their term running until 2018 and those who are not running for
>> reelection. But yes, I do see how you personally would be hampered
>> from really engaging this topic.
>>
>> Best regards, Eli
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>> On 18 October 2017 at 10:23, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Jorge Sanz < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> HI Eli,
>>>>>
>>>>> If I recall correctly, we answered you that Jeff immediately resigned
>>>>> from
>>>>> his position as CRO and he has not been involved at all in any Board
>>>>> elections CRO activity so everything is correctly handled except (and
>>>>> we
>>>>> apologized for that) the lack of a Trac ticket for the alias change.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Jorge. I know those are the events that happened, however, I
>>>> never saw the Board deliberate and consider whether that is acceptable
>>>> or not. In my opinion, it is not, however I'm not on the Board, nor
>>>> is one Director's opinion a position of the Board. In the absence of
>>>> any Board action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>>>> I was left to conclude "that this issue is of no concern to the
>>>> Board."
>>>>
>>>> Has the Board deliberated or considered this? Did they take a position?
>>>>
>>>> The reason to have a process and follow it even when you maybe don't
>>>> "need" it, is so that you also follow the process when you *do* need
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 18 October 2017 at 18:07, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Venka, all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Eli Adam < [hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Venka,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan
>>>>>>> < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Eli,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> First of all, thanks to Jorge for volunteering to be co-CRO
>>>>>>>> and fixing the CRO alias promptly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, thanks Jorge.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regarding your other comment reproduced below;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>>>>>>>> their last meeting,
>>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> of no concern to the Board.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The question of review this topic at the 2017-10-05 board meeting
>>>>>>>> did
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> arise
>>>>>>>> as the nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-08.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for fixing my mistake, I misunderstood the dates and thought
>>>>>>> that nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-01. Sorry to
>>>>>>> suggest that it was of no concern to the Board when it is actually
>>>>>>> unknown.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It appears that voting has now started and I don't see any Board
>>>>>> threads on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2017-October/thread.html>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would like to assure you that I share your concern about the
>>>>>>>> proper
>>>>>>>> process.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Great, I hope that the Board follows the proper process. I'll stop
>>>>>>> making noise and allow the proper process to work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should I now conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Venka
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/12/2017 1:58 AM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Eli,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I did it yesterday without having a ticket involved. My bad sorry.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I confirm that the CRO alias is now sending emails only to Vasile
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Jorge Sanz
>>>>>>>> https://jorgesanz.net>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my phone, excuse my brevity and typos
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> El 11 oct. 2017 18:36, "Eli Adam" < [hidden email]> escribió:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Fenoy Gerald
>>>>>>>> < [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dear Eli,
>>>>>>>> as you may have notice, Jeff has stepped down from his position of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> co-CRO when accepting the Nicolas’ nomination [1].
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I didn't find that thread while scanning through the archive.
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>> for pointing it out to me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeff was involved in the charter member election process as co-CRO
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> he is no more so, I guess, there is no issue for the board election.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Was the [hidden email] email alias updated? I didn't notice a ticket
>>>>>>>> for that. I'm impressed that there is so little concern about the
>>>>>>>> proper process. The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>>>>>>>> their last meeting,
>>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> of no concern to the Board.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-October/036449.html>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Gérald Fenoy
>>>>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Le 11 oct. 2017 à 16:04, Eli Adam < [hidden email]> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nicolas,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, nicolas bozon
>>>>>>>> < [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is my honor to nominate Jeff McKenna for the OSGeo Board of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Directors
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> election.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO accept
>>>>>>>> your nomination,
>>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>>>>>>>> In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>>>>>>>> remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Most of you knows Jeff's energy and passion for everything OSGeo,
>>>>>>>> and i
>>>>>>>> would probably be mistaken trying to summarize his countless
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> contributions
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> over the years, at every level of our Foundation. His leadership and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> long
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> involvement in the OSGeo and FOSS4G communities made him the Winner
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Solz Katz Award in 2016, and i cannot add more. For those of you who
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> really not know Jeff yet, the User:Jeff_McKenna wiki page is a good
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> read
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> before you vote.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeff already served three times at the board and has a deep
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> understanding of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> both the director role and the current OSGeo strategic plan.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Experienced
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> with OSGeo governance and bylaws, Jeff also knows a lot about
>>>>>>>> projects
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> people. He is always ready to help build locally and to represent
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> globally.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeff is a great communicator and enthusiastic community leader, and
>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>> believe he will be an excellent OSGeo director again. Please let us
>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>> welcome Jeff back at the Board!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nicolas Bozon
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Jeff McKenna agreed to be nominated and i decided to send the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> nomination
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> directly to the Discuss list with cc to CRO, so it avoids Jeff to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> confirm to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> himself that he accepts the nomination. The Board Nominations page
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> need to be updated, could you please Vasile ? Sorry for shortening
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> nomination process in this special case.
>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The point is not to avoid Jeff confirming to himself that he accepts
>>>>>>>> the nomination, it is to avoid the CRO running an election and
>>>>>>>> counting votes when they are also standing for election. It is
>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>> the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that this situation
>>>>>>>> doesn't occur. The Board should not appoint CROs who might accept a
>>>>>>>> nomination and people who might accept a nomination should not
>>>>>>>> accept
>>>>>>>> appointment as CRO. Maybe we should return to the tradition of the
>>>>>>>> CRO being a sitting Board member with a year remaining on their
>>>>>>>> term.
>>>>>>>> CRO is a difficult job and much credit to those who do it. Also,
>>>>>>>> someone (other than me) should be paying attention to the basic
>>>>>>>> process and raise these issues.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jorge Sanz
>>>>> http://www.osgeo.org>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>>
>
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Vasile Crăciunescu
> geo-spatial.org: An elegant place for sharing geoKnowledge & geoData
> http://www.geo-spatial.org> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/geo-spatial_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
|
123
|
Locked
