+1 to Frank's summary, D.
On 03-08-15 22:04, Mateusz Loskot wrote: > I have filled the survey matching my answers ad close to my views as > possible but I also give +1 to agree with Frank's comments > > 3 sie 2015 18:39 "Frank Warmerdam" <warmer...@pobox.com > <mailto:warmer...@pobox.com>> napisał(a): > > Folks, > > For what it's worth, I also do not feel comfortable with completing > the survey as it is currently structured as the structure forces me to > give answers that don't really represent my views. > > For what it's worth I am in favor of: > - a modest number of charter members using something like the > current process > - open membership > - no manditory membership fees > - make every effort to treat regular members the same as charter > members except for the minimum voting stuff required to be legally > distinct. > > Best regards, > Frank > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Jim Klassen <klassen...@gmail.com > <mailto:klassen...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > I have been involved in the MapServer and GeoMoose projects since > before > > OSGeo existed. I remember the founding of OSGeo and the heated > > discussions that took place to define the direction OSGeo would take. > > The future of OSGeo and how it interacts with its members is very > > important to me. > > > > However, as a charter member, this current discussion and particularly > > the survey has me confused as to how I should respond. > > > > For starters: Should I be taking the survey now or waiting for it > to be > > improved? Where are the results of this survey going? Does this > survey > > count as an official vote(s)? > > > > On 08/03/2015 05:16 AM, Vasile Craciunescu wrote: > >> Dear Bruce, Steve, Even, Peter, Dan and others, > >> > >> Sorry for replying so late. I'm in vacation with limited Internet > >> access. Personally, I agree with many of your points. However, as > >> Steven already pointed out, we had a few days of open discussions on > >> the survey before sending to our Charter members. Somehow I expected > >> that our Charter members are subscribed on the discuss and board > >> mailing list and following the topics there. Perhaps we need a > >> dedicated mailing list for our Charter members or the invitation to > >> comment on the survey should be also sent individually to all our > >> Charter members. Not sure about the right approach. Anyway, please > >> keep in mind that this is the first time we are polling our members > >> and we still have to learn and adjust our communication skills. > >> > >> Now, regarding the survey. The main point was to find the best method > >> to select our Charter members. This is an ongoing discussion for many > >> years. The survey included the previous voting options and some new > >> proposals. Then, some people suggested to use this opportunity to > >> include additionally questions regarding the future of OSGeo > >> membership. That's how the survey was created. The survey is really > >> flawed if is not connected with the discussions on the "board" and > >> "discuss" mailing lists. Different people, different angles, > different > >> opinions... But only a fraction of our members expressed their > >> ideas/questions/opinions before assembling the survey. That's why the > >> survey looks heterogeneous. I did my best to merge similar topics and > >> not to include redundant questions. I also did not remove any > question > >> based on my own judgement. Anyway, I find this exercise very useful > >> for our community. We should discuss further to keep our organization > >> on the right track. > >> > >> Warm regards from the sunny Black Sea coast! > >> Vasile > >> > >> PS I'm slowly catching up will all the emails on this thread (most of > >> them privately sent). I'll get back when I have the full picture. > >> > >> On 7/31/15 3:07 AM, Bruce Bannerman wrote: > >>> Hi Vassile, > >>> > >>> This survey appears to be flawed. > >>> > >>> I applaud your efforts to bring this issue to a head, but I'm not > >>> convinced > >>> that we'll get valid results from the survey. > >>> > >>> > >>> In my case: > >>> > >>> I believe that there should be open membership for any interested, > >>> perhaps > >>> with a membership fee. > >>> > >>> I also see the value of recognising key contributors voted > through some > >>> meritocracy process as the current Charter Membership allows, > with this > >>> group having a voting responsibility. This is in essence not very > >>> different > >>> from the concept of a 'committers' group within an open source > >>> project. I > >>> don't really care if the name 'Charter Membership' is changed. > >>> > >>> > >>> However the survey appears to lead people into a binary > situation where > >>> they believe in 'open' or 'closed' with 'closed' apparently > assigned to > >>> those favouring 'Charter Membership'. > >>> > >>> > >>> For example: > >>> > >>> I'd like to vote NO to 'Should OSGeo move from the actual elected > >>> Charter > >>> member model to an (open) regular membership?' > >>> > >>> But, YES to 'If you agree with the OSGeo regular membership, do > you also > >>> agree with a low annual membership fee?' > >>> > >>> However, I'm precluded from doing so, because I answered NO to Q1. > >>> > >>> For Question 4, I would like to answer both: > >>> > >>> - YES for Open, in the context that everyone interested should be > >>> able to > >>> participate in discussions and the OSGeo Community (perhaps having > >>> paid a > >>> membership fee); and > >>> > >>> - YES for 'Closed', in the context of key votes being subject to the > >>> equivalent of a 'Committers' list where people have been voted in > >>> through > >>> some meritocracy process. > >>> > >>> - However, I can only choose one or the other! > >>> > >>> > >>> I haven't read the remaining questions at this stage, given the > flawed > >>> questions at the beginning. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> I apologise if you had sent this out for review earlier. I have > not been > >>> following this debate closely as this type of membership noise pops > >>> up on a > >>> regular basis. > >>> > >>> However, when this proceeds to a vote of the OSGeo Charter > membership, I > >>> need to register a comment. > >>> > >>> > >>> For consideration. > >>> > >>> Bruce > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> From: Vasile Crăciunescu <c...@osgeo.org <mailto:c...@osgeo.org>> > >>>> Reply-To: Vasile Crăciunescu <c...@osgeo.org <mailto:c...@osgeo.org>> > >>>> Date: Thursday, 30 July 2015 23:52 > >>>> To: Bruce Bannerman <> > >>>> Subject: Invitation to participate in the OSGeo membership > >>>> consultations > >>>> > >>>> Dear Bruce, > >>>> > >>>> As an existing OSGeo Charter Member, you have been invited to > >>>> participate > >>>> in the 2015 OSGeo membership consultations. > >>>> > >>>> To participate, please click on the link below. > >>>> > >>>> Sincerely, > >>>> > >>>> Vasile () > >>>> > >>>> ---------------------------------------------- > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Discuss mailing list > >>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org> > >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org> > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > -- > > ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------- > I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, > warmer...@pobox.com <mailto:warmer...@pobox.com> > light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam > and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -- Yours sincerely, ir. Dirk Frigne CEO Geosparc n.v. Brugsesteenweg 587 B-9030 Ghent Tel: +32 9 236 60 18 GSM: +32 495 508 799 http://www.geomajas.org http://www.geosparc.com _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss