El 7 de abril de 2022 12:28:00 p. m. GMT-03:00, Andreas Mantke <ma...@gmx.de>
escribió:
>Hi,
>
>I'm put out by your reply. You try to move the subject to an emotional
>we versus them or bad cop versus good cop.
That's a repeated pattern, indeed.
>There were 10 TDF members which decided to stand for the board at the
>end of last year. Seven of this members were elected board members and
>the other three deputy member.
>As they decided to candidate for the board they knew about the CoI rules
>of TDF. Thus they decided to follow this rules. A member of the board
>(also a deputy) could only wear one head on the both sides of a table.
>The whole board is responsible for the whole budget including e.g. items
>for tenders. Thus ihe/she could not vote on the budget and be part of a
>company / organization which bids for one of the tenders.
>And to add: if CoI rules have no pain they are no real such rules. In
>such case they wouldn't be worth the paper (and effort to write them down).
>
>And to add further: the whole thread has nothing to do with a judgment
>about the work of any (deputy) member of the board!
>
>Am 07.04.22 um 11:58 schrieb Michael Meeks:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> Since it seems that there are only complainers on one side of
>> this discussion let me give another view. If only to avoid the idea
>> that there should be major concessions on one side only.
>>
>> I am thrilled that three of our founding team: Kendy, Thorsten
>> & Cor are on the board, and fully engaged in the discussions - they
>> (along with some of the other board members plus of course deputies) -
>> bring as individuals a huge depth of experience, competence, and a
>> decade+ of service each to LibreOffice. They are reasonable, friendly
>> and like-able people who are working for the best of TDF. From what I
>> have seen their approach to political discussion and compromise is to
>> be reasonable, winsome, to look for what is possible for the good of
>> TDF & LibreOffice.
>>
>> I see excluding such representatives of the Trustees from
>> fundamental matters (such as budgeting what topics to spend money on,
>> how to structure and run TDF etc.) as in conflict with our statutes.
>>
>> Such decisions by statute ($8.1) are to be taken by the whole
>> board, which stands together for damages: I suppose I agree with
>> Andreas on this. Any CoI policy is for a specific interest - clearly
>> no director should vote on the conclusion of a transaction with
>> themselves ($9.6) - that is reasonable: but the fundamental decisions
>> are for the whole board - and budgeting is the explicit task ($8.2) of
>> the board of directors as they fulfill the will of the founders and
>> mandate of the members.
>>
>> Again - it is important that our CoI policy is not used
>> maliciously to subvert democracy by excluding directors from their
>> main statutory tasks. If this new policy is being mis-used for this it
>> should be significantly amended in this regard; it was not the
>> intention when it was created.
>>
>> So - let me vigorously complain as a Trustee: that those for
>> whom I voted are being encouraged to exclude themselves from the very
>> things that they were elected to do. The very idea that we should
>> exclude some of our most competent is grim for TDF - particularly when
>> Thorsten, Kendy, Cor, Gabor represent over 50% of the first-choice
>> votes for board members. The will of those Trustees should be
>> reflected our budget.
>>
>> Worse - since TDF uses tenders to complete what it needs to
>> spend each year (something we are very badly behind at at last check
>> with Eur ~2.5 million in the bank) - it is easy to argue that any
>> decision with a spending aspect either increases or decreases the
>> remaining pool for tendering.
>>
>> Using that fact to try to exclude anyone whose employer might
>> (independent of them) submit a bid for a tender - from any spending
>> related board decision (which is most of them) is grim. I've seen this
>> argument aired here recently.
>>
>> It means tearing up the votes from Trustees for those people,
>> while walking all over our statutes.
>>
>> TDF really needs competent suppliers to bid for its tenders -
>> and we could use more entities applying there, not fewer.
>>
>> TDF really needs competent, friendly, welcoming, helpful
>> people to stand on its board and represent its Trustees - we have only
>> just about enough.
>>
>> TDF already has a firewall to avoid self dealing. It has a
>> fair and completely opaque (to those bidding) process for choosing who
>> wins. It has a process for selecting and estimating tasks that is open
>> to all ideas - and is promoted by TDF itself. The ESC ranks ideas -
>> and the primary problem in the past there has been chasing ESC members
>> to do the work to evaluate and rank the proposals. The ESC ranking is
>> typically provided with full details of who voted whatever way to the
>> board, then the board takes this into account as it ranks this in the
>> budget.
>
>
>If I don't oversee something in the mails on this list, the board seemed
>not to be provided with a list of the detailed votes of the ESC members
>at least this time.
>
>And maybe it's also wise to think about a possible CoI of ESC members,
>in case they vote on items for tender, which they later bid for.
>
>(...)
>
>Regards,
>Andreas
>
>--
>## Free Software Advocate
>## Plone add-on developer
>## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
>Problems?
>https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
>Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
>List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
>Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
>
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
