Dimitris: No apologies needed, it is an important discussion to have! But as you are aware, there are no easy answers.
The Board of Directors has been discussing these issues a lot, both on lists and in face-to-face meetings. The problem is that OSGeo has a very broad charter and a very diverse membership, and so it is hard to just say "we should do this" or "we should do that" without looking at all the tradeoffs involved. And furthermore, doing anything substantial requires funding, which is hard to get without a clear set of goals and objectives to take to potential sponsors -- and so it's a circular problem. One of the first steps we know we need to take, before we can go after any real sponsorship funding, is to fix some long-standing problems with our accounting practices and our unclear nonprofit status; both of those are being worked on actively right now (by Daniel and me). Another needed step is to revive the Marketing committee; Arnulf and Cameron are doing that right now as well. That said, a lesson we're coming to grips with is that certain "business development" and "back-office" functions are not well-suited to a volunteer-based organization or even a single paid Executive Director generalist -- those jobs require specific skillsets, which some of us think it might be best to outsource or partner with another allied nonprofit organization. Since the board is made up of volunteers spread across the globe, it's hard to be able to move as fast on any of these issues as I would like, but I do think the current board is slowly digging our way through all this. For more discussions on this stuff, I'd encourage you to join the board list. -mpg > -----Original Message----- > From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org > [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Dimitris Kotzinos > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 3:50 PM > To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org > Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] RE: Defining an OSGeo Ambassador role > > Dear all, > > following up on Michael's e-mail, I have to say that I find the idea of > having OSGEO ambassadors very useful and I think that we should keep it > to a limited number of people (maybe about a dozen as a maximum) > geographically spread all over the globe. > > Moreover, I would like to take the opportunity to put forward some > additional concerns. > I have followed in this list some (sometimes fierce) discussions about > managerial issues of the OSGEO (e.g. the discussion on the decision to > have no Executive Director, the discussion on the responsibilities for > the Beijing conference and so on). I am still missing the discussion (at > the discussion list) of a more complete and coherent plan on how we > think OSGEO should go on for the next couple of years. > I think that having Ambassadors or not should be part of a greater plan > on how we think OSGEO should handle (sometimes practical) issues like > its representation in events, its public face, the conferences we want > to put together (and how) and so on ... > Thus my request is to discuss the whatever plan as a whole and not as > individual ideas. > > My apologies for opening up again a discussion that might already be > obsolete :) > > Best regards, > > Dimitris Kotzinos > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
