UN meeting

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
20 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

UN meeting

Massimiliano Cannata

Dear Directors,
I would like to recall a motion that was set in stand-by in the Bonn board meeting. I kindly ask you to discuss the support the of one or two OSGeo representative of the UN Open Gis initiative strategic board to this important meeting in Seoul.

Regards
Maxi


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

Re: UN meeting

Sanghee Shin
Dear Maxi, 

Can we know any progress on this matter with UN? At Bonn, we decided to ask UN to do something for mutual acknowledgement such as putting OSGeo’s contribution to its publications. 

Cheers, 
신상희
---
Shin, Sanghee
Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial Company
http://www.gaia3d.com 

2016. 10. 9., 오후 5:57, Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]> 작성:

Dear Directors,
I would like to recall a motion that was set in stand-by in the Bonn board meeting. I kindly ask you to discuss the support the of one or two OSGeo representative of the UN Open Gis initiative strategic board to this important meeting in Seoul.

Regards
Maxi

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


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

Re: UN Meeting

stevenfeldman
In reply to this post by Massimiliano Cannata
I hope the board will separate a discussion on whether it wishes to be represented at this meeting from the process of selecting a representative.

Ideally the Board would set out how attendance at this meeting fits in with its broader outreach strategy, identify the objectives of attendance and through that the type of representation that is needed (i.e. advocacy, marketing, standards, technical or academic)

The process of selecting a delegate to support should be open and transparent providing an opportunity for any qualified OSGeo member to put themselves forward for the role. The Board should in my opinion, set out a policy and process for selecting representatives before making a decision on who should represent us at this meeting.
______
Steven


On 9 Oct 2016, at 20:00, [hidden email] wrote:

Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:57:36 +0200
From: Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]>
To: OSGeo Board <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Board] UN meeting
Message-ID:
<[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Dear Directors,
I would like to recall a motion that was set in stand-by in the Bonn board
meeting. I kindly ask you to discuss the support the of one or two OSGeo
representative of the UN Open Gis initiative strategic board to this
important meeting in Seoul.

Regards
Maxi


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

Re: UN Meeting

Massimiliano Cannata
dear Steven and Board,
as chair of the UnitedNation committee I want to clarify that the process is very clear and transparent.

1) in 2015 at FOSS4G Seoul the UN had a meeting with the OSGeo board to ask for support in developing their initiative toward an Open Source solution to support UN missions
2) OSGeo accepted and a new committee was formed ("UnitedNation committee": UNcom) with open membership
3) OSGeo board asks for a responsible of the chapter and I was appointed as chair of the new committee together with Prof. Brovelli to share the work load
4) the two chairs of the UNcom participated in Brinfdisi at the kick-off of the "UN open GIS" initiative
4) myself and Maria worked together with UN to set up the initiative providing our contributions and decided to act on two mainstreams (OSgeo and geo4all) so to double our footprint
5) OSGeo and Geo4All is deeply part of the initiative with UNcom members in all the "UN open GIS" initiative governance bodies
6) in November a new general f2f meeting is going to be held in Seoul and the UN chair invited me and Maria as co-chairs of the OSGeo UNcom and members of the "UN open GIS" initiative strategic board

As i'm always direct i would like to to be clear regarding voices that I heard that I would like to have an "holiday" financed by OSGeo to go to Seoul and participate to this meeting:
this is absolutely false and I consider any inference or rumors in this direction very offensive.
I have many things to do and leaving one week for this meeting would be very expensive for me (both for family and work), in fact I would try to skip this if possible.

See https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/UnitedNations_Committee for more info about activities conducted.


Best Regards,
maxi


2016-10-10 11:36 GMT+02:00 Steven Feldman <[hidden email]>:
I hope the board will separate a discussion on whether it wishes to be represented at this meeting from the process of selecting a representative.

Ideally the Board would set out how attendance at this meeting fits in with its broader outreach strategy, identify the objectives of attendance and through that the type of representation that is needed (i.e. advocacy, marketing, standards, technical or academic)

The process of selecting a delegate to support should be open and transparent providing an opportunity for any qualified OSGeo member to put themselves forward for the role. The Board should in my opinion, set out a policy and process for selecting representatives before making a decision on who should represent us at this meeting.
______
Steven


On 9 Oct 2016, at 20:00, [hidden email] wrote:

Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:57:36 +0200
From: Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]>
To: OSGeo Board <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Board] UN meeting
Message-ID:
<[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Dear Directors,
I would like to recall a motion that was set in stand-by in the Bonn board
meeting. I kindly ask you to discuss the support the of one or two OSGeo
representative of the UN Open Gis initiative strategic board to this
important meeting in Seoul.

Regards
Maxi


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



--
Massimiliano Cannata

Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica

Responsabile settore Geomatica


Istituto scienze della Terra

Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design

Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana

Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio

Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14

Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09

[hidden email]

www.supsi.ch/ist


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

Re: UN Meeting

Anita Graser
Thank you Maxi for providing this great overview of the process and thank you for serving as UNcom chair!

Imho the board cannot and has no interest in micro-managing the OSGeo committees. We appreciate the hard work of all volunteers in our committees, projects, and the community as a whole.

I'm not sure if UNcom already has a budget of its own. If not, I'd suggest to provide a budget for 2017 so the committee can decide on participation at meetings autonomously. 

Best wishes,
Anita





On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]> wrote:
dear Steven and Board,
as chair of the UnitedNation committee I want to clarify that the process is very clear and transparent.

1) in 2015 at FOSS4G Seoul the UN had a meeting with the OSGeo board to ask for support in developing their initiative toward an Open Source solution to support UN missions
2) OSGeo accepted and a new committee was formed ("UnitedNation committee": UNcom) with open membership
3) OSGeo board asks for a responsible of the chapter and I was appointed as chair of the new committee together with Prof. Brovelli to share the work load
4) the two chairs of the UNcom participated in Brinfdisi at the kick-off of the "UN open GIS" initiative
4) myself and Maria worked together with UN to set up the initiative providing our contributions and decided to act on two mainstreams (OSgeo and geo4all) so to double our footprint
5) OSGeo and Geo4All is deeply part of the initiative with UNcom members in all the "UN open GIS" initiative governance bodies
6) in November a new general f2f meeting is going to be held in Seoul and the UN chair invited me and Maria as co-chairs of the OSGeo UNcom and members of the "UN open GIS" initiative strategic board

As i'm always direct i would like to to be clear regarding voices that I heard that I would like to have an "holiday" financed by OSGeo to go to Seoul and participate to this meeting:
this is absolutely false and I consider any inference or rumors in this direction very offensive.
I have many things to do and leaving one week for this meeting would be very expensive for me (both for family and work), in fact I would try to skip this if possible.

See https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/UnitedNations_Committee for more info about activities conducted.


Best Regards,
maxi


2016-10-10 11:36 GMT+02:00 Steven Feldman <[hidden email]>:
I hope the board will separate a discussion on whether it wishes to be represented at this meeting from the process of selecting a representative.

Ideally the Board would set out how attendance at this meeting fits in with its broader outreach strategy, identify the objectives of attendance and through that the type of representation that is needed (i.e. advocacy, marketing, standards, technical or academic)

The process of selecting a delegate to support should be open and transparent providing an opportunity for any qualified OSGeo member to put themselves forward for the role. The Board should in my opinion, set out a policy and process for selecting representatives before making a decision on who should represent us at this meeting.
______
Steven


On 9 Oct 2016, at 20:00, [hidden email] wrote:

Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:57:36 +0200
From: Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]>
To: OSGeo Board <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Board] UN meeting
Message-ID:
<[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Dear Directors,
I would like to recall a motion that was set in stand-by in the Bonn board
meeting. I kindly ask you to discuss the support the of one or two OSGeo
representative of the UN Open Gis initiative strategic board to this
important meeting in Seoul.

Regards
Maxi


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



--
Massimiliano Cannata

Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica

Responsabile settore Geomatica


Istituto scienze della Terra

Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design

Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana

Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio

Tel. <a href="tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2014" value="+41586666214" target="_blank">+41 (0)58 666 62 14

Fax <a href="tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2009" value="+41586666209" target="_blank">+41 (0)58 666 62 09

[hidden email]

www.supsi.ch/ist


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


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

Re: UN Meeting

Suchith Anand
I am just an ordinary OSGeo member but would like to say that we need to work to empower all our committees and volunteers.

So +1 to Anita's suggestion.

Thank you to everyone who is working for OSGeo.

Best wishes,

Suchith

________________________________________
From: Board <[hidden email]> on behalf of Anita Graser <[hidden email]>
Sent: 10 October 2016 11:56 AM
To: Massimiliano Cannata
Cc: OSGeo Board; Steven Feldman
Subject: Re: [Board] UN Meeting

Thank you Maxi for providing this great overview of the process and thank you for serving as UNcom chair!

Imho the board cannot and has no interest in micro-managing the OSGeo committees. We appreciate the hard work of all volunteers in our committees, projects, and the community as a whole.

I'm not sure if UNcom already has a budget of its own. If not, I'd suggest to provide a budget for 2017 so the committee can decide on participation at meetings autonomously.

Best wishes,
Anita





On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
dear Steven and Board,
as chair of the UnitedNation committee I want to clarify that the process is very clear and transparent.

1) in 2015 at FOSS4G Seoul the UN had a meeting with the OSGeo board to ask for support in developing their initiative toward an Open Source solution to support UN missions
2) OSGeo accepted and a new committee was formed ("UnitedNation committee": UNcom) with open membership
3) OSGeo board asks for a responsible of the chapter and I was appointed as chair of the new committee together with Prof. Brovelli to share the work load
4) the two chairs of the UNcom participated in Brinfdisi at the kick-off of the "UN open GIS" initiative
4) myself and Maria worked together with UN to set up the initiative providing our contributions and decided to act on two mainstreams (OSgeo and geo4all) so to double our footprint
5) OSGeo and Geo4All is deeply part of the initiative with UNcom members in all the "UN open GIS" initiative governance bodies
6) in November a new general f2f meeting is going to be held in Seoul and the UN chair invited me and Maria as co-chairs of the OSGeo UNcom and members of the "UN open GIS" initiative strategic board

As i'm always direct i would like to to be clear regarding voices that I heard that I would like to have an "holiday" financed by OSGeo to go to Seoul and participate to this meeting:
this is absolutely false and I consider any inference or rumors in this direction very offensive.
I have many things to do and leaving one week for this meeting would be very expensive for me (both for family and work), in fact I would try to skip this if possible.

See https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/UnitedNations_Committee for more info about activities conducted.


Best Regards,
maxi


2016-10-10 11:36 GMT+02:00 Steven Feldman <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>>:
I hope the board will separate a discussion on whether it wishes to be represented at this meeting from the process of selecting a representative.

Ideally the Board would set out how attendance at this meeting fits in with its broader outreach strategy, identify the objectives of attendance and through that the type of representation that is needed (i.e. advocacy, marketing, standards, technical or academic)

The process of selecting a delegate to support should be open and transparent providing an opportunity for any qualified OSGeo member to put themselves forward for the role. The Board should in my opinion, set out a policy and process for selecting representatives before making a decision on who should represent us at this meeting.
______
Steven


On 9 Oct 2016, at 20:00, [hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]> wrote:

Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:57:36 +0200
From: Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>>
To: OSGeo Board <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>>
Subject: [Board] UN meeting
Message-ID:
<[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Dear Directors,
I would like to recall a motion that was set in stand-by in the Bonn board
meeting. I kindly ask you to discuss the support the of one or two OSGeo
representative of the UN Open Gis initiative strategic board to this
important meeting in Seoul.

Regards
Maxi


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



--
Massimiliano Cannata

Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica

Responsabile settore Geomatica


Istituto scienze della Terra

Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design

Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana

Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio

Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14<tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2014>

Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09<tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2009>

[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>

www.supsi.ch/ist<http://www.supsi.ch/ist>

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




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

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

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

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

Re: UN Meeting

Massimiliano Cannata
In reply to this post by Anita Graser
Dear Anita,
thanks for your mail.

If i remember correctly in Bonn the board decided to make a call for 2017 budgetw to the committees, indicating the rules and the general availability.
Budget voices should be detailed with respect to the OSGeo strategy and should constitute the OSGeo action plan indeed.

Best,
Maxi

2016-10-10 12:56 GMT+02:00 Anita Graser <[hidden email]>:
Thank you Maxi for providing this great overview of the process and thank you for serving as UNcom chair!

Imho the board cannot and has no interest in micro-managing the OSGeo committees. We appreciate the hard work of all volunteers in our committees, projects, and the community as a whole.

I'm not sure if UNcom already has a budget of its own. If not, I'd suggest to provide a budget for 2017 so the committee can decide on participation at meetings autonomously. 

Best wishes,
Anita





On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]> wrote:
dear Steven and Board,
as chair of the UnitedNation committee I want to clarify that the process is very clear and transparent.

1) in 2015 at FOSS4G Seoul the UN had a meeting with the OSGeo board to ask for support in developing their initiative toward an Open Source solution to support UN missions
2) OSGeo accepted and a new committee was formed ("UnitedNation committee": UNcom) with open membership
3) OSGeo board asks for a responsible of the chapter and I was appointed as chair of the new committee together with Prof. Brovelli to share the work load
4) the two chairs of the UNcom participated in Brinfdisi at the kick-off of the "UN open GIS" initiative
4) myself and Maria worked together with UN to set up the initiative providing our contributions and decided to act on two mainstreams (OSgeo and geo4all) so to double our footprint
5) OSGeo and Geo4All is deeply part of the initiative with UNcom members in all the "UN open GIS" initiative governance bodies
6) in November a new general f2f meeting is going to be held in Seoul and the UN chair invited me and Maria as co-chairs of the OSGeo UNcom and members of the "UN open GIS" initiative strategic board

As i'm always direct i would like to to be clear regarding voices that I heard that I would like to have an "holiday" financed by OSGeo to go to Seoul and participate to this meeting:
this is absolutely false and I consider any inference or rumors in this direction very offensive.
I have many things to do and leaving one week for this meeting would be very expensive for me (both for family and work), in fact I would try to skip this if possible.

See https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/UnitedNations_Committee for more info about activities conducted.


Best Regards,
maxi


2016-10-10 11:36 GMT+02:00 Steven Feldman <[hidden email]>:
I hope the board will separate a discussion on whether it wishes to be represented at this meeting from the process of selecting a representative.

Ideally the Board would set out how attendance at this meeting fits in with its broader outreach strategy, identify the objectives of attendance and through that the type of representation that is needed (i.e. advocacy, marketing, standards, technical or academic)

The process of selecting a delegate to support should be open and transparent providing an opportunity for any qualified OSGeo member to put themselves forward for the role. The Board should in my opinion, set out a policy and process for selecting representatives before making a decision on who should represent us at this meeting.
______
Steven


On 9 Oct 2016, at 20:00, [hidden email] wrote:

Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:57:36 +0200
From: Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]>
To: OSGeo Board <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Board] UN meeting
Message-ID:
<[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Dear Directors,
I would like to recall a motion that was set in stand-by in the Bonn board
meeting. I kindly ask you to discuss the support the of one or two OSGeo
representative of the UN Open Gis initiative strategic board to this
important meeting in Seoul.

Regards
Maxi


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



--
Massimiliano Cannata

Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica

Responsabile settore Geomatica


Istituto scienze della Terra

Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design

Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana

Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio

Tel. <a href="tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2014" value="+41586666214" target="_blank">+41 (0)58 666 62 14

Fax <a href="tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2009" value="+41586666209" target="_blank">+41 (0)58 666 62 09

[hidden email]

www.supsi.ch/ist


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




--
Massimiliano Cannata

Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica

Responsabile settore Geomatica


Istituto scienze della Terra

Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design

Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana

Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio

Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14

Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09

[hidden email]

www.supsi.ch/ist


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

Re: UN Meeting

Marc Vloemans-3
Unfortunately....micro management is already the case with the Conference committee with the result that Steven has announced his resignation. (And I do not see anyone backing down, say 'oops'. Only good hard working volunteers running away)

With all due respect: we have a mission and vision statement. And some disparate actions.
To have a strategy, something more is required, e.g. a 'market'/environment assessment, stakeholder analysis, an idea what audiences we cater to etc etc etc
And a strategy making process that is inclusive and not top-down.

Until that happens any budget allocation is subjective and not explicitly rooted in choices carried by the community. So either say we spend the money or not and either way live with the consequences.

OSGeo has grown into a mature organisation. Please, let's follow mature processes. And if those are not yet in existence, then please design those. 

Kind regards,
Marc Vloemans


Op 10 okt. 2016 om 18:39 heeft Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]> het volgende geschreven:

Dear Anita,
thanks for your mail.

If i remember correctly in Bonn the board decided to make a call for 2017 budgetw to the committees, indicating the rules and the general availability.
Budget voices should be detailed with respect to the OSGeo strategy and should constitute the OSGeo action plan indeed.

Best,
Maxi

2016-10-10 12:56 GMT+02:00 Anita Graser <[hidden email]>:
Thank you Maxi for providing this great overview of the process and thank you for serving as UNcom chair!

Imho the board cannot and has no interest in micro-managing the OSGeo committees. We appreciate the hard work of all volunteers in our committees, projects, and the community as a whole.

I'm not sure if UNcom already has a budget of its own. If not, I'd suggest to provide a budget for 2017 so the committee can decide on participation at meetings autonomously. 

Best wishes,
Anita





On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]> wrote:
dear Steven and Board,
as chair of the UnitedNation committee I want to clarify that the process is very clear and transparent.

1) in 2015 at FOSS4G Seoul the UN had a meeting with the OSGeo board to ask for support in developing their initiative toward an Open Source solution to support UN missions
2) OSGeo accepted and a new committee was formed ("UnitedNation committee": UNcom) with open membership
3) OSGeo board asks for a responsible of the chapter and I was appointed as chair of the new committee together with Prof. Brovelli to share the work load
4) the two chairs of the UNcom participated in Brinfdisi at the kick-off of the "UN open GIS" initiative
4) myself and Maria worked together with UN to set up the initiative providing our contributions and decided to act on two mainstreams (OSgeo and geo4all) so to double our footprint
5) OSGeo and Geo4All is deeply part of the initiative with UNcom members in all the "UN open GIS" initiative governance bodies
6) in November a new general f2f meeting is going to be held in Seoul and the UN chair invited me and Maria as co-chairs of the OSGeo UNcom and members of the "UN open GIS" initiative strategic board

As i'm always direct i would like to to be clear regarding voices that I heard that I would like to have an "holiday" financed by OSGeo to go to Seoul and participate to this meeting:
this is absolutely false and I consider any inference or rumors in this direction very offensive.
I have many things to do and leaving one week for this meeting would be very expensive for me (both for family and work), in fact I would try to skip this if possible.

See https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/UnitedNations_Committee for more info about activities conducted.


Best Regards,
maxi


2016-10-10 11:36 GMT+02:00 Steven Feldman <[hidden email]>:
I hope the board will separate a discussion on whether it wishes to be represented at this meeting from the process of selecting a representative.

Ideally the Board would set out how attendance at this meeting fits in with its broader outreach strategy, identify the objectives of attendance and through that the type of representation that is needed (i.e. advocacy, marketing, standards, technical or academic)

The process of selecting a delegate to support should be open and transparent providing an opportunity for any qualified OSGeo member to put themselves forward for the role. The Board should in my opinion, set out a policy and process for selecting representatives before making a decision on who should represent us at this meeting.
______
Steven


On 9 Oct 2016, at 20:00, [hidden email] wrote:

Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:57:36 +0200
From: Massimiliano Cannata <[hidden email]>
To: OSGeo Board <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Board] UN meeting
Message-ID:
<[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Dear Directors,
I would like to recall a motion that was set in stand-by in the Bonn board
meeting. I kindly ask you to discuss the support the of one or two OSGeo
representative of the UN Open Gis initiative strategic board to this
important meeting in Seoul.

Regards
Maxi


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



--
Massimiliano Cannata

Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica

Responsabile settore Geomatica


Istituto scienze della Terra

Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design

Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana

Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio

Tel. <a href="tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2014" value="+41586666214" target="_blank">+41 (0)58 666 62 14

Fax <a href="tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2009" value="+41586666209" target="_blank">+41 (0)58 666 62 09

[hidden email]

www.supsi.ch/ist


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




--
Massimiliano Cannata

Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica

Responsabile settore Geomatica


Istituto scienze della Terra

Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design

Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana

Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio

Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14

Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09

[hidden email]

www.supsi.ch/ist

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

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

Re: UN Meeting

Anita Graser
Hi Marc,

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 7:22 PM, Marc Vloemans <[hidden email]> wrote:
Unfortunately....micro management is already the case with the Conference committee

​The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.​) Any way, lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.

To have a strategy, something more is required, e.g. a 'market'/environment assessment, stakeholder analysis, an idea what audiences we cater to etc etc etc
And a strategy making process that is inclusive and not top-down.

​Do you know some promising techniques to run such an inclusive strategy making process? We tried collecting feedback concerning mission/vision/actions earlier this year with limited success.

I haven't seen this step done really well yet ... anywhere ...​ So I would be really interested in learning about successful "mature processes".

Thank you for your input and best wishes,
Anita


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

Re: UN Meeting

Cameron Shorter


On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote:
> ​The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I
> have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.​) Any way,
> lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
Hi Anita,
I suggest read the thread embedded into my last email I've just CCed to
the board.
It doesn't include everything, but does include enough that you should
get an idea.

The quick summary:
* After a conference committee face-to-face meeting at FOSS4G, Steven
took on an action to clarify conference committee procedures.
* He did this, put it out for comment, actioned feedback, then put to
the proposal to vote
* He received positive feedback from majority of the conference
committee, and two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also on the
board).
* This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate.
* Maria has suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by putting on
the board agenda. (Hence the implication of being micro-managed by the
board)

--
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

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

Re: UN Meeting

Maria Antonia Brovelli

For completeness, the main point under discussion was the one related to voting procedures.

"Everyday topics will be decided upon by an open vote of all list participants in a clearly designated separate mail thread (+1/-1) over a minimum of two business days with a minimum participation of 3 votes. Ideally we aim for consensus falling back on simple majority vote where necessary. The result will be clearly declared afterwards (or whatever is decided)."
I believed (and still believe) that for important decisions as those of the CC, we need more participation in voting, i.e. a quorum of 50 %.
As far as I have understood there is a handful of such decisions a year.
After a long discussion about this topic, what was suggested by many volunteers (of the CC or not of the CC) is that the governance has to be decided by the Board and the CC decides only on the Conferences.
Here we are: we will discuss this topic in next Board meeting.



An for precision: when we made this discussion and I proposed to put the decision of governance in the hand of the Board, I was not in  the Board. 


Lovely day.

Maria







----------------------------------------------------
Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
Politecnico di Milano

ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)"; OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa Challenge; SIFET 

Sol Katz Award 2015

 

Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY)

Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321

e-mail1: [hidden email][hidden email]

e-mail2: [hidden email]




 




Da: Board <[hidden email]> per conto di Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>
Inviato: lunedì 10 ottobre 2016 22.38
A: Anita Graser; [hidden email]
Oggetto: Re: [Board] UN Meeting
 


On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote:
> The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I
> have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.) Any way,
> lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
Hi Anita,
I suggest read the thread embedded into my last email I've just CCed to
the board.
It doesn't include everything, but does include enough that you should
get an idea.

The quick summary:
* After a conference committee face-to-face meeting at FOSS4G, Steven
took on an action to clarify conference committee procedures.
* He did this, put it out for comment, actioned feedback, then put to
the proposal to vote
* He received positive feedback from majority of the conference
committee, and two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also on the
board).
* This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate.
* Maria has suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by putting on
the board agenda. (Hence the implication of being micro-managed by the
board)

--
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

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

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

Re: UN Meeting

Marc Vloemans-3
Suggestion regarding the upcoming Board discussion on governance; committee affairs to be decided by lists seems an impractical and demotivating affair.

Committee members are those that do the actual work, whereas lists with all interested in the committee work should be for more general purposes (e.g. Info Dissemination and soliciting info/advice/help).
When committee members are hindered in their activities by inactive lists members, after a while committees experience demotivation and members leave or become inactive.

It all boils down to appropriate leadership; is community management a matter of enabling or directing the members?
Procedures giving 'lists' freedom to act/vote without responsibility (doing the work) seems counter to what I believed OSGeo stood for.
Which leaves committees two choices: do as told or do without telling. Either way, bad for our culture.

I trust all involved realise OSGeo is at a critical junction. Either we change and plan/prepare for a durable viable future that involves all stakeholders or we waste our valuable money and scarce volunteer time towards irrelevance. 

Wishing you wisdom and courage.

Kind regards,
Marc Vloemans


Op 11 okt. 2016 om 08:26 heeft Maria Antonia Brovelli <[hidden email]> het volgende geschreven:

For completeness, the main point under discussion was the one related to voting procedures.

"Everyday topics will be decided upon by an open vote of all list participants in a clearly designated separate mail thread (+1/-1) over a minimum of two business days with a minimum participation of 3 votes. Ideally we aim for consensus falling back on simple majority vote where necessary. The result will be clearly declared afterwards (or whatever is decided)."
I believed (and still believe) that for important decisions as those of the CC, we need more participation in voting, i.e. a quorum of 50 %.
As far as I have understood there is a handful of such decisions a year.
After a long discussion about this topic, what was suggested by many volunteers (of the CC or not of the CC) is that the governance has to be decided by the Board and the CC decides only on the Conferences.
Here we are: we will discuss this topic in next Board meeting.



An for precision: when we made this discussion and I proposed to put the decision of governance in the hand of the Board, I was not in  the Board. 


Lovely day.

Maria







----------------------------------------------------
Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
Politecnico di Milano

ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)"; OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa Challenge; SIFET 

Sol Katz Award 2015

 

Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY)

Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321

e-mail1: [hidden email][hidden email]

e-mail2: [hidden email]




 




Da: Board <[hidden email]> per conto di Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>
Inviato: lunedì 10 ottobre 2016 22.38
A: Anita Graser; [hidden email]
Oggetto: Re: [Board] UN Meeting
 


On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote:
> The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I
> have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.) Any way,
> lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
Hi Anita,
I suggest read the thread embedded into my last email I've just CCed to
the board.
It doesn't include everything, but does include enough that you should
get an idea.

The quick summary:
* After a conference committee face-to-face meeting at FOSS4G, Steven
took on an action to clarify conference committee procedures.
* He did this, put it out for comment, actioned feedback, then put to
the proposal to vote
* He received positive feedback from majority of the conference
committee, and two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also on the
board).
* This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate.
* Maria has suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by putting on
the board agenda. (Hence the implication of being micro-managed by the
board)

--
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

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

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

Re: UN Meeting

Sanghee Shin
In reply to this post by Maria Antonia Brovelli
Dear all, 

OSGeo is a community of communities and not a centralised organisation. I don’t believe Board could set up or apply any single clear governance rule for the whole committees. If there’s any weird(to some) governance procedure in any committees, that’s also the part of the committees’s long history that started before OSGeo. I support the autonomy of each committee which knows the real matter there. 

Cheers, 
신상희
---
Shin, Sanghee
Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial Company
http://www.gaia3d.com 

2016. 10. 11., 오후 3:26, Maria Antonia Brovelli <[hidden email]> 작성:

For completeness, the main point under discussion was the one related to voting procedures.

"Everyday topics will be decided upon by an open vote of all list participants in a clearly designated separate mail thread (+1/-1) over a minimum of two business days with a minimum participation of 3 votes. Ideally we aim for consensus falling back on simple majority vote where necessary. The result will be clearly declared afterwards (or whatever is decided)."
I believed (and still believe) that for important decisions as those of the CC, we need more participation in voting, i.e. a quorum of 50 %.
As far as I have understood there is a handful of such decisions a year.
After a long discussion about this topic, what was suggested by many volunteers (of the CC or not of the CC) is that the governance has to be decided by the Board and the CC decides only on the Conferences.
Here we are: we will discuss this topic in next Board meeting.



An for precision: when we made this discussion and I proposed to put the decision of governance in the hand of the Board, I was not in  the Board. 

Lovely day.
Maria






----------------------------------------------------
Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
Politecnico di Milano

ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)"; OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa Challenge; SIFET 
Sol Katz Award 2015

 

Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY)
Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321



 




Da: Board <[hidden email]> per conto di Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>
Inviato: lunedì 10 ottobre 2016 22.38
A: Anita Graser; [hidden email]
Oggetto: Re: [Board] UN Meeting
 


On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote:
> The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I 
> have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.) Any way, 
> lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
Hi Anita,
I suggest read the thread embedded into my last email I've just CCed to 
the board.
It doesn't include everything, but does include enough that you should 
get an idea.

The quick summary:
* After a conference committee face-to-face meeting at FOSS4G, Steven 
took on an action to clarify conference committee procedures.
* He did this, put it out for comment, actioned feedback, then put to 
the proposal to vote
* He received positive feedback from majority of the conference 
committee, and two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also on the 
board).
* This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate.
* Maria has suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by putting on 
the board agenda. (Hence the implication of being micro-managed by the 
board)

-- 
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

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


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

Re: UN Meeting

Sanghee Shin
In reply to this post by Marc Vloemans-3
Dear all, 

As a diverse organisation, it’s natural for OSGeo to have many different voices. I don’t think there will be any perfect organisation in the world. Or perfect organisation should be noisy with lots of controversy. One thing I’m worried about is that, I feel, we’re losing trust to each other steadily. Distrust could harm volunteer’s enthusiasm. I’m worried about that. 

Cheers, 
신상희
---
Shin, Sanghee
Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial Company
http://www.gaia3d.com 

2016. 10. 11., 오후 8:57, Marc Vloemans <[hidden email]> 작성:

Suggestion regarding the upcoming Board discussion on governance; committee affairs to be decided by lists seems an impractical and demotivating affair.

Committee members are those that do the actual work, whereas lists with all interested in the committee work should be for more general purposes (e.g. Info Dissemination and soliciting info/advice/help).
When committee members are hindered in their activities by inactive lists members, after a while committees experience demotivation and members leave or become inactive.

It all boils down to appropriate leadership; is community management a matter of enabling or directing the members?
Procedures giving 'lists' freedom to act/vote without responsibility (doing the work) seems counter to what I believed OSGeo stood for.
Which leaves committees two choices: do as told or do without telling. Either way, bad for our culture.

I trust all involved realise OSGeo is at a critical junction. Either we change and plan/prepare for a durable viable future that involves all stakeholders or we waste our valuable money and scarce volunteer time towards irrelevance. 

Wishing you wisdom and courage.

Kind regards,
Marc Vloemans


Op 11 okt. 2016 om 08:26 heeft Maria Antonia Brovelli <[hidden email]> het volgende geschreven:

For completeness, the main point under discussion was the one related to voting procedures.


"Everyday topics will be decided upon by an open vote of all list participants in a clearly designated separate mail thread (+1/-1) over a minimum of two business days with a minimum participation of 3 votes. Ideally we aim for consensus falling back on simple majority vote where necessary. The result will be clearly declared afterwards (or whatever is decided)."
I believed (and still believe) that for important decisions as those of the CC, we need more participation in voting, i.e. a quorum of 50 %.
As far as I have understood there is a handful of such decisions a year.
After a long discussion about this topic, what was suggested by many volunteers (of the CC or not of the CC) is that the governance has to be decided by the Board and the CC decides only on the Conferences.
Here we are: we will discuss this topic in next Board meeting.



An for precision: when we made this discussion and I proposed to put the decision of governance in the hand of the Board, I was not in  the Board. 


Lovely day.

Maria







----------------------------------------------------
Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
Politecnico di Milano

ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)"; OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa Challenge; SIFET 
Sol Katz Award 2015

 

Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY)
Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321



 




Da: Board <[hidden email]> per conto di Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>
Inviato: lunedì 10 ottobre 2016 22.38
A: Anita Graser; [hidden email]
Oggetto: Re: [Board] UN Meeting
 


On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote:
> The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I
> have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.) Any way,
> lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
Hi Anita,
I suggest read the thread embedded into my last email I've just CCed to
the board.
It doesn't include everything, but does include enough that you should
get an idea.

The quick summary:
* After a conference committee face-to-face meeting at FOSS4G, Steven
took on an action to clarify conference committee procedures.
* He did this, put it out for comment, actioned feedback, then put to
the proposal to vote
* He received positive feedback from majority of the conference
committee, and two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also on the
board).
* This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate.
* Maria has suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by putting on
the board agenda. (Hence the implication of being micro-managed by the
board)

--
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

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


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

Re: UN Meeting

Marc Vloemans-3
In reply to this post by Sanghee Shin
+1 Sanghee

Kind regards,
Marc Vloemans


Op 12 okt. 2016 om 11:10 heeft Sanghee Shin <[hidden email]> het volgende geschreven:

Dear all, 

OSGeo is a community of communities and not a centralised organisation. I don’t believe Board could set up or apply any single clear governance rule for the whole committees. If there’s any weird(to some) governance procedure in any committees, that’s also the part of the committees’s long history that started before OSGeo. I support the autonomy of each committee which knows the real matter there. 

Cheers, 
신상희
---
Shin, Sanghee
Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial Company
http://www.gaia3d.com 

2016. 10. 11., 오후 3:26, Maria Antonia Brovelli <[hidden email]> 작성:

For completeness, the main point under discussion was the one related to voting procedures.

"Everyday topics will be decided upon by an open vote of all list participants in a clearly designated separate mail thread (+1/-1) over a minimum of two business days with a minimum participation of 3 votes. Ideally we aim for consensus falling back on simple majority vote where necessary. The result will be clearly declared afterwards (or whatever is decided)."
I believed (and still believe) that for important decisions as those of the CC, we need more participation in voting, i.e. a quorum of 50 %.
As far as I have understood there is a handful of such decisions a year.
After a long discussion about this topic, what was suggested by many volunteers (of the CC or not of the CC) is that the governance has to be decided by the Board and the CC decides only on the Conferences.
Here we are: we will discuss this topic in next Board meeting.



An for precision: when we made this discussion and I proposed to put the decision of governance in the hand of the Board, I was not in  the Board. 

Lovely day.
Maria






----------------------------------------------------
Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
Politecnico di Milano

ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)"; OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa Challenge; SIFET 
Sol Katz Award 2015

 

Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY)
Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321



 




Da: Board <[hidden email]> per conto di Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>
Inviato: lunedì 10 ottobre 2016 22.38
A: Anita Graser; [hidden email]
Oggetto: Re: [Board] UN Meeting
 


On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote:
> The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I 
> have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.) Any way, 
> lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
Hi Anita,
I suggest read the thread embedded into my last email I've just CCed to 
the board.
It doesn't include everything, but does include enough that you should 
get an idea.

The quick summary:
* After a conference committee face-to-face meeting at FOSS4G, Steven 
took on an action to clarify conference committee procedures.
* He did this, put it out for comment, actioned feedback, then put to 
the proposal to vote
* He received positive feedback from majority of the conference 
committee, and two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also on the 
board).
* This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate.
* Maria has suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by putting on 
the board agenda. (Hence the implication of being micro-managed by the 
board)

-- 
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

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

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

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

Re: UN Meeting

Venkatesh Raghavan-2
In reply to this post by Sanghee Shin
Sanghee and all,

I am fine with autonomy for our committees and have
never been against it. We only need to state this clearly
in our Committee guidelines [1] which I choose to follow
in absence of any other guideline.

I agree with what Arnulf stated well in his mail
[2]. I reproduce parts of his e-mail [2] below
as he has phrased it better than I can.

"In that case we may want to change the general voting system to a
majority vote as is typical for democratic systems. This is something
for the board or maybe even the charter members to decide."

So, let us decide;

a) if majority vote will be 50% of the votes cast or X% as decided
    by the committee.
b) if a -1 vote can have different meanings for different committees
c) if committees is free to decide who could be a member, which
member could vote and which member is automatically retired.

And having taken the decision, let us update our committee
guidelines [1] and also have our committees to come up with their
own guidelines and put it on the wiki. This will make our
decision making process clear and transparent.

[1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines
[2]
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2016-September/003944.html

Best

Venka

On 2016/10/12 18:10, Sanghee Shin wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> OSGeo is a community of communities and not a centralised
> organisation. I don’t believe Board could set up or apply any single
> clear governance rule for the whole committees. If there’s any
> weird(to some) governance procedure in any committees, that’s also
> the part of the committees’s long history that started before OSGeo.
> I support the autonomy of each committee which knows the real matter
> there.
>
> Cheers, 신상희 --- Shin, Sanghee Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial Company
> http://www.gaia3d.com
>
>> 2016. 10. 11., 오후 3:26, Maria Antonia Brovelli
>> <[hidden email]> 작성:
>>
>> For completeness, the main point under discussion was the one
>> related to voting procedures. "Everyday topics will be decided upon
>> by an open vote of all list participants in a clearly designated
>> separate mail thread (+1/-1) over a minimum of two business days
>> with a minimum participation of 3 votes. Ideally we aim for
>> consensus falling back on simple majority vote where necessary. The
>> result will be clearly declared afterwards (or whatever is
>> decided)." I believed (and still believe) that for important
>> decisions as those of the CC, we need more participation in voting,
>> i.e. a quorum of 50 %. As far as I have understood there is a
>> handful of such decisions a year. After a long discussion about
>> this topic, what was suggested by many volunteers (of the CC or not
>> of the CC) is that the governance has to be decided by the Board
>> and the CC decides only on the Conferences. Here we are: we will
>> discuss this topic in next Board meeting.
>>
>>
>> An for precision: when we made this discussion and I proposed to
>> put the decision of governance in the hand of the Board, I was not
>> in  the Board.
>>
>> Lovely day. Maria
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------- Prof. Maria
>> Antonia Brovelli Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
>> Politecnico di Milano
>>
>> ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)";
>> OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa
>> Challenge; SIFET Sol Katz Award 2015
>>
>> Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY) Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob.
>> +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321 e-mail1:
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]> e-mail2 <>:
>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Da: Board <[hidden email]> per conto di Cameron
>> Shorter <[hidden email]> Inviato: lunedì 10 ottobre 2016
>> 22.38 A: Anita Graser; [hidden email] Oggetto: Re: [Board]
>> UN Meeting
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote:
>>> The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I
>>>  have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.) Any
>>> way, lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
>> Hi Anita, I suggest read the thread embedded into my last email
>> I've just CCed to the board. It doesn't include everything, but
>> does include enough that you should get an idea.
>>
>> The quick summary: * After a conference committee face-to-face
>> meeting at FOSS4G, Steven took on an action to clarify conference
>> committee procedures. * He did this, put it out for comment,
>> actioned feedback, then put to the proposal to vote * He received
>> positive feedback from majority of the conference committee, and
>> two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also on the board). *
>> This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate. * Maria has
>> suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by putting on the
>> board agenda. (Hence the implication of being micro-managed by the
>>  board)
>>
>> -- Cameron Shorter M +61 419 142 254
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
>> [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>_______________________________________________
>>
>>
Board mailing list
>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
> [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>

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

Re: UN Meeting

Michael Smith
It seems to me that this should be a by committee choice, how they want to self organize, what works best for them. We are a do-ocracy. We should let them do.

Michael Smith
Remote Sensing/GIS Center
US Army Corps of Engineers

> On Oct 12, 2016, at 6:25 AM, Venka <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Sanghee and all,
>
> I am fine with autonomy for our committees and have
> never been against it. We only need to state this clearly
> in our Committee guidelines [1] which I choose to follow
> in absence of any other guideline.
>
> I agree with what Arnulf stated well in his mail
> [2]. I reproduce parts of his e-mail [2] below
> as he has phrased it better than I can.
>
> "In that case we may want to change the general voting system to a majority vote as is typical for democratic systems. This is something for the board or maybe even the charter members to decide."
>
> So, let us decide;
>
> a) if majority vote will be 50% of the votes cast or X% as decided
>   by the committee.
> b) if a -1 vote can have different meanings for different committees
> c) if committees is free to decide who could be a member, which
> member could vote and which member is automatically retired.
>
> And having taken the decision, let us update our committee
> guidelines [1] and also have our committees to come up with their
> own guidelines and put it on the wiki. This will make our
> decision making process clear and transparent.
>
> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines
> [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2016-September/003944.html
>
> Best
>
> Venka
>
>> On 2016/10/12 18:10, Sanghee Shin wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> OSGeo is a community of communities and not a centralised
>> organisation. I don’t believe Board could set up or apply any single
>> clear governance rule for the whole committees. If there’s any
>> weird(to some) governance procedure in any committees, that’s also
>> the part of the committees’s long history that started before OSGeo.
>> I support the autonomy of each committee which knows the real matter
>> there.
>>
>> Cheers, 신상희 --- Shin, Sanghee Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial Company
>> http://www.gaia3d.com
>>
>>> 2016. 10. 11., 오후 3:26, Maria Antonia Brovelli
>>> <[hidden email]> 작성:
>>>
>>> For completeness, the main point under discussion was the one
>>> related to voting procedures. "Everyday topics will be decided upon
>>> by an open vote of all list participants in a clearly designated
>>> separate mail thread (+1/-1) over a minimum of two business days
>>> with a minimum participation of 3 votes. Ideally we aim for
>>> consensus falling back on simple majority vote where necessary. The
>>> result will be clearly declared afterwards (or whatever is
>>> decided)." I believed (and still believe) that for important
>>> decisions as those of the CC, we need more participation in voting,
>>> i.e. a quorum of 50 %. As far as I have understood there is a
>>> handful of such decisions a year. After a long discussion about
>>> this topic, what was suggested by many volunteers (of the CC or not
>>> of the CC) is that the governance has to be decided by the Board
>>> and the CC decides only on the Conferences. Here we are: we will
>>> discuss this topic in next Board meeting.
>>>
>>>
>>> An for precision: when we made this discussion and I proposed to
>>> put the decision of governance in the hand of the Board, I was not
>>> in  the Board.
>>>
>>> Lovely day. Maria
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------- Prof. Maria
>>> Antonia Brovelli Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
>>> Politecnico di Milano
>>>
>>> ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)";
>>> OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa
>>> Challenge; SIFET Sol Katz Award 2015
>>>
>>> Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY) Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob.
>>> +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321 e-mail1:
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]> e-mail2 <>:
>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Da: Board <[hidden email]> per conto di Cameron
>>> Shorter <[hidden email]> Inviato: lunedì 10 ottobre 2016
>>> 22.38 A: Anita Graser; [hidden email] Oggetto: Re: [Board]
>>> UN Meeting
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote:
>>>> The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I
>>>> have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.) Any
>>>> way, lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
>>> Hi Anita, I suggest read the thread embedded into my last email
>>> I've just CCed to the board. It doesn't include everything, but
>>> does include enough that you should get an idea.
>>>
>>> The quick summary: * After a conference committee face-to-face
>>> meeting at FOSS4G, Steven took on an action to clarify conference
>>> committee procedures. * He did this, put it out for comment,
>>> actioned feedback, then put to the proposal to vote * He received
>>> positive feedback from majority of the conference committee, and
>>> two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also on the board). *
>>> This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate. * Maria has
>>> suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by putting on the
>>> board agenda. (Hence the implication of being micro-managed by the
>>> board)
>>>
>>> -- Cameron Shorter M +61 419 142 254
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
>>> [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>_______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
> Board mailing list
>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
>> [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UN Meeting

Marc Vloemans-3
+1 Michael & Venka

I am definitely in favour of self-organising groups. Only if stalemates arise they should seek help and advise from Board et al.

Kind regards,
Marc Vloemans


> Op 12 okt. 2016 om 12:39 heeft Michael Smith <[hidden email]> het volgende geschreven:
>
> It seems to me that this should be a by committee choice, how they want to self organize, what works best for them. We are a do-ocracy. We should let them do.
>
> Michael Smith
> Remote Sensing/GIS Center
> US Army Corps of Engineers
>
>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 6:25 AM, Venka <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Sanghee and all,
>>
>> I am fine with autonomy for our committees and have
>> never been against it. We only need to state this clearly
>> in our Committee guidelines [1] which I choose to follow
>> in absence of any other guideline.
>>
>> I agree with what Arnulf stated well in his mail
>> [2]. I reproduce parts of his e-mail [2] below
>> as he has phrased it better than I can.
>>
>> "In that case we may want to change the general voting system to a majority vote as is typical for democratic systems. This is something for the board or maybe even the charter members to decide."
>>
>> So, let us decide;
>>
>> a) if majority vote will be 50% of the votes cast or X% as decided
>>  by the committee.
>> b) if a -1 vote can have different meanings for different committees
>> c) if committees is free to decide who could be a member, which
>> member could vote and which member is automatically retired.
>>
>> And having taken the decision, let us update our committee
>> guidelines [1] and also have our committees to come up with their
>> own guidelines and put it on the wiki. This will make our
>> decision making process clear and transparent.
>>
>> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines
>> [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2016-September/003944.html
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Venka
>>
>>> On 2016/10/12 18:10, Sanghee Shin wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> OSGeo is a community of communities and not a centralised
>>> organisation. I don’t believe Board could set up or apply any single
>>> clear governance rule for the whole committees. If there’s any
>>> weird(to some) governance procedure in any committees, that’s also
>>> the part of the committees’s long history that started before OSGeo.
>>> I support the autonomy of each committee which knows the real matter
>>> there.
>>>
>>> Cheers, 신상희 --- Shin, Sanghee Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial Company
>>> http://www.gaia3d.com
>>>
>>>> 2016. 10. 11., 오후 3:26, Maria Antonia Brovelli
>>>> <[hidden email]> 작성:
>>>>
>>>> For completeness, the main point under discussion was the one
>>>> related to voting procedures. "Everyday topics will be decided upon
>>>> by an open vote of all list participants in a clearly designated
>>>> separate mail thread (+1/-1) over a minimum of two business days
>>>> with a minimum participation of 3 votes. Ideally we aim for
>>>> consensus falling back on simple majority vote where necessary. The
>>>> result will be clearly declared afterwards (or whatever is
>>>> decided)." I believed (and still believe) that for important
>>>> decisions as those of the CC, we need more participation in voting,
>>>> i.e. a quorum of 50 %. As far as I have understood there is a
>>>> handful of such decisions a year. After a long discussion about
>>>> this topic, what was suggested by many volunteers (of the CC or not
>>>> of the CC) is that the governance has to be decided by the Board
>>>> and the CC decides only on the Conferences. Here we are: we will
>>>> discuss this topic in next Board meeting.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> An for precision: when we made this discussion and I proposed to
>>>> put the decision of governance in the hand of the Board, I was not
>>>> in  the Board.
>>>>
>>>> Lovely day. Maria
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------- Prof. Maria
>>>> Antonia Brovelli Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
>>>> Politecnico di Milano
>>>>
>>>> ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)";
>>>> OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa
>>>> Challenge; SIFET Sol Katz Award 2015
>>>>
>>>> Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY) Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob.
>>>> +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321 e-mail1:
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>[hidden email]
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]> e-mail2 <>:
>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Da: Board <[hidden email]> per conto di Cameron
>>>> Shorter <[hidden email]> Inviato: lunedì 10 ottobre 2016
>>>> 22.38 A: Anita Graser; [hidden email] Oggetto: Re: [Board]
>>>> UN Meeting
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote:
>>>>> The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I
>>>>> have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.) Any
>>>>> way, lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
>>>> Hi Anita, I suggest read the thread embedded into my last email
>>>> I've just CCed to the board. It doesn't include everything, but
>>>> does include enough that you should get an idea.
>>>>
>>>> The quick summary: * After a conference committee face-to-face
>>>> meeting at FOSS4G, Steven took on an action to clarify conference
>>>> committee procedures. * He did this, put it out for comment,
>>>> actioned feedback, then put to the proposal to vote * He received
>>>> positive feedback from majority of the conference committee, and
>>>> two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also on the board). *
>>>> This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate. * Maria has
>>>> suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by putting on the
>>>> board agenda. (Hence the implication of being micro-managed by the
>>>> board)
>>>>
>>>> -- Cameron Shorter M +61 419 142 254
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
>>>> [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>_______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>> Board mailing list
>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
>>> [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UN Meeting

Arnulf Christl
In reply to this post by Michael Smith
Thanks Michael,
I totally agree. For those not familiar with the model:
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Do-ocracy

It currently says on that page that this is "The OSGeo Way of Doing
Things". If there is any change to this approach I will very much insist
that this cannot be decided by the Board of Directors only but has to be
run by the Charter Members because it fundamentally changes the way our
organization functions.


In my earlier mail which Venka cited I did propose to potentially change
to a more "democratic" majority voting system. Just to make sure that I
don't get misunderstood: I DO NOT believe that this is a good way for
OSGeo and would asbolutely prefer to continue with a do-ocratic and
maybe also somewhat meritocractic approach. Plus I agree with Michael
and others that this decision should be taken by the committees themselves.

The other mail only intended to point out that the size of OSGeo and
growing anonymity of actors may REQUIRE us to implement a more
majority-bassed approach to stay credible to the outseide - because this
is how big anonymous political organizations work (unfortunately no
other system has proven to be better). As an evolving organism we will
have to look into change, whether we like it or not.


Best regards,
Arnulf


On 12.10.2016 12:39, Michael Smith wrote:

> It seems to me that this should be a by committee choice, how they
> want to self organize, what works best for them. We are a do-ocracy.
> We should let them do.
>
> Michael Smith Remote Sensing/GIS Center US Army Corps of Engineers
>
>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 6:25 AM, Venka <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Sanghee and all,
>>
>> I am fine with autonomy for our committees and have never been
>> against it. We only need to state this clearly in our Committee
>> guidelines [1] which I choose to follow in absence of any other
>> guideline.
>>
>> I agree with what Arnulf stated well in his mail [2]. I reproduce
>> parts of his e-mail [2] below as he has phrased it better than I
>> can.
>>
>> "In that case we may want to change the general voting system to a
>> majority vote as is typical for democratic systems. This is
>> something for the board or maybe even the charter members to
>> decide."
>>
>> So, let us decide;
>>
>> a) if majority vote will be 50% of the votes cast or X% as decided
>> by the committee. b) if a -1 vote can have different meanings for
>> different committees c) if committees is free to decide who could
>> be a member, which member could vote and which member is
>> automatically retired.
>>
>> And having taken the decision, let us update our committee
>> guidelines [1] and also have our committees to come up with their
>> own guidelines and put it on the wiki. This will make our decision
>> making process clear and transparent.
>>
>> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines [2]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2016-September/003944.html
>>
>>
>>
Best

>>
>> Venka
>>
>>> On 2016/10/12 18:10, Sanghee Shin wrote: Dear all,
>>>
>>> OSGeo is a community of communities and not a centralised
>>> organisation. I don’t believe Board could set up or apply any
>>> single clear governance rule for the whole committees. If there’s
>>> any weird(to some) governance procedure in any committees, that’s
>>> also the part of the committees’s long history that started
>>> before OSGeo. I support the autonomy of each committee which
>>> knows the real matter there.
>>>
>>> Cheers, 신상희 --- Shin, Sanghee Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial
>>> Company http://www.gaia3d.com
>>>
>>>> 2016. 10. 11., 오후 3:26, Maria Antonia Brovelli
>>>> <[hidden email]> 작성:
>>>>
>>>> For completeness, the main point under discussion was the one
>>>> related to voting procedures. "Everyday topics will be decided
>>>> upon by an open vote of all list participants in a clearly
>>>> designated separate mail thread (+1/-1) over a minimum of two
>>>> business days with a minimum participation of 3 votes. Ideally
>>>> we aim for consensus falling back on simple majority vote where
>>>> necessary. The result will be clearly declared afterwards (or
>>>> whatever is decided)." I believed (and still believe) that for
>>>> important decisions as those of the CC, we need more
>>>> participation in voting, i.e. a quorum of 50 %. As far as I
>>>> have understood there is a handful of such decisions a year.
>>>> After a long discussion about this topic, what was suggested by
>>>> many volunteers (of the CC or not of the CC) is that the
>>>> governance has to be decided by the Board and the CC decides
>>>> only on the Conferences. Here we are: we will discuss this
>>>> topic in next Board meeting.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> An for precision: when we made this discussion and I proposed
>>>> to put the decision of governance in the hand of the Board, I
>>>> was not in  the Board.
>>>>
>>>> Lovely day. Maria
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------- Prof.
>>>> Maria Antonia Brovelli Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS
>>>> Professor Politecnico di Milano
>>>>
>>>> ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)";
>>>> OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa
>>>> Challenge; SIFET Sol Katz Award 2015
>>>>
>>>> Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY) Tel. +39-031-3327336 -
>>>> Mob. +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321 e-mail1:
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>[hidden email]
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]> e-mail2 <>:
>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Da: Board <[hidden email]> per conto di Cameron
>>>> Shorter <[hidden email]> Inviato: lunedì 10 ottobre
>>>> 2016 22.38 A: Anita Graser; [hidden email] Oggetto: Re:
>>>> [Board] UN Meeting
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote: The board
>>>>> micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I have
>>>>> not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.) Any
>>>>> way, lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
>>>> Hi Anita, I suggest read the thread embedded into my last
>>>> email I've just CCed to the board. It doesn't include
>>>> everything, but does include enough that you should get an
>>>> idea.
>>>>
>>>> The quick summary: * After a conference committee face-to-face
>>>> meeting at FOSS4G, Steven took on an action to clarify
>>>> conference committee procedures. * He did this, put it out for
>>>> comment, actioned feedback, then put to the proposal to vote *
>>>> He received positive feedback from majority of the conference
>>>> committee, and two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also
>>>> on the board). * This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate.
>>>> * Maria has suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by
>>>> putting on the board agenda. (Hence the implication of being
>>>> micro-managed by the board)
>>>>
>>>> -- Cameron Shorter M +61 419 142 254
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing
>>>> list [hidden email]
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board 
>>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>_______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
Board mailing list

>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board 
>>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing
>>> list [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
> [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UN Meeting

Angelos Tzotsos
In reply to this post by Michael Smith
+1 Michael and Venka

We need to make sure that those who do the work get to decide. If our
current guidelines need revision, we should look into that.

Best,
Angelos

On 10/12/2016 01:39 PM, Michael Smith wrote:

> It seems to me that this should be a by committee choice, how they want to self organize, what works best for them. We are a do-ocracy. We should let them do.
>
> Michael Smith
> Remote Sensing/GIS Center
> US Army Corps of Engineers
>
>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 6:25 AM, Venka <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Sanghee and all,
>>
>> I am fine with autonomy for our committees and have
>> never been against it. We only need to state this clearly
>> in our Committee guidelines [1] which I choose to follow
>> in absence of any other guideline.
>>
>> I agree with what Arnulf stated well in his mail
>> [2]. I reproduce parts of his e-mail [2] below
>> as he has phrased it better than I can.
>>
>> "In that case we may want to change the general voting system to a majority vote as is typical for democratic systems. This is something for the board or maybe even the charter members to decide."
>>
>> So, let us decide;
>>
>> a) if majority vote will be 50% of the votes cast or X% as decided
>>    by the committee.
>> b) if a -1 vote can have different meanings for different committees
>> c) if committees is free to decide who could be a member, which
>> member could vote and which member is automatically retired.
>>
>> And having taken the decision, let us update our committee
>> guidelines [1] and also have our committees to come up with their
>> own guidelines and put it on the wiki. This will make our
>> decision making process clear and transparent.
>>
>> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Committee_Guidelines
>> [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2016-September/003944.html
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Venka
>>
>>> On 2016/10/12 18:10, Sanghee Shin wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> OSGeo is a community of communities and not a centralised
>>> organisation. I don’t believe Board could set up or apply any single
>>> clear governance rule for the whole committees. If there’s any
>>> weird(to some) governance procedure in any committees, that’s also
>>> the part of the committees’s long history that started before OSGeo.
>>> I support the autonomy of each committee which knows the real matter
>>> there.
>>>
>>> Cheers, 신상희 --- Shin, Sanghee Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial Company
>>> http://www.gaia3d.com
>>>
>>>> 2016. 10. 11., 오후 3:26, Maria Antonia Brovelli
>>>> <[hidden email]> 작성:
>>>>
>>>> For completeness, the main point under discussion was the one
>>>> related to voting procedures. "Everyday topics will be decided upon
>>>> by an open vote of all list participants in a clearly designated
>>>> separate mail thread (+1/-1) over a minimum of two business days
>>>> with a minimum participation of 3 votes. Ideally we aim for
>>>> consensus falling back on simple majority vote where necessary. The
>>>> result will be clearly declared afterwards (or whatever is
>>>> decided)." I believed (and still believe) that for important
>>>> decisions as those of the CC, we need more participation in voting,
>>>> i.e. a quorum of 50 %. As far as I have understood there is a
>>>> handful of such decisions a year. After a long discussion about
>>>> this topic, what was suggested by many volunteers (of the CC or not
>>>> of the CC) is that the governance has to be decided by the Board
>>>> and the CC decides only on the Conferences. Here we are: we will
>>>> discuss this topic in next Board meeting.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> An for precision: when we made this discussion and I proposed to
>>>> put the decision of governance in the hand of the Board, I was not
>>>> in  the Board.
>>>>
>>>> Lovely day. Maria
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------- Prof. Maria
>>>> Antonia Brovelli Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
>>>> Politecnico di Milano
>>>>
>>>> ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)";
>>>> OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa
>>>> Challenge; SIFET Sol Katz Award 2015
>>>>
>>>> Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY) Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob.
>>>> +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321 e-mail1:
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>[hidden email]
>>>> <mailto:[hidden email]> e-mail2 <>:
>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Da: Board <[hidden email]> per conto di Cameron
>>>> Shorter <[hidden email]> Inviato: lunedì 10 ottobre 2016
>>>> 22.38 A: Anita Graser; [hidden email] Oggetto: Re: [Board]
>>>> UN Meeting
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/10/2016 4:53 AM, Anita Graser wrote:
>>>>> The board micro-managed the conference com? (I'm asking because I
>>>>> have not read the entire thread on the conf mailing list.) Any
>>>>> way, lets try not to repeat this process with the UNCom.
>>>> Hi Anita, I suggest read the thread embedded into my last email
>>>> I've just CCed to the board. It doesn't include everything, but
>>>> does include enough that you should get an idea.
>>>>
>>>> The quick summary: * After a conference committee face-to-face
>>>> meeting at FOSS4G, Steven took on an action to clarify conference
>>>> committee procedures. * He did this, put it out for comment,
>>>> actioned feedback, then put to the proposal to vote * He received
>>>> positive feedback from majority of the conference committee, and
>>>> two -1 vetos from Venka and Maria (who are also on the board). *
>>>> This resulted in 120+ emails, and a stalemate. * Maria has
>>>> suggested to solve the problem of voting rules by putting on the
>>>> board agenda. (Hence the implication of being micro-managed by the
>>>> board)
>>>>
>>>> -- Cameron Shorter M +61 419 142 254
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
>>>> [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>_______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>> Board mailing list
>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ Board mailing list
>>> [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board


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

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