Thanks Till For adding&pointing out the bottom line; even in a globalised world most European entities preferably deal with European entities. Especially if it concerns public policy and commercial matters. So let locals scratch local itches (imagine a European knocking on the door of the White House ;-) And let's get downto business (sorry, for the pun).
@All By the way, when organisations grow and mature, they usually differentiate their activities and adapt organisational structure to accommodate the wider/growing variety of members/stakeholders/customers. This way no one feels left out and there is always something for someone to benefit from. For OSGeo this is the next step/phase in its evolution. Whether, it will lead to uncontrollable fragmentation, chaos and unwanted split offs is principally a managerial problem. Something for Board, officers, Chartermembers etc to deal with in a sensible, professional and rational manner. So....question.....who feel(s) this particular itch the most....???? Vriendelijke groet, Marc Vloemans > Op 8 mei 2016 om 08:53 heeft till.ad...@fossgis.de het volgende geschreven: > > Dear all, > > after editing on an email for some days now, I noticed after all that most of > the words, I'd like to contribute to this duscussion have already been > written down by Marc. > > So I agree with Marc on most of his points but like to put the focus more on > the business side of view: Please keep in mind, that in order to get at leat > a tiny bit of influence in Brussels and EU-related organisations requires a > European Organisation. No matter that this is related to a global, > US-resident organisation. > > Regards, Till > > > Am 2016-05-03 23:35, schrieb Marc VLOEMANS: >> Dear Maxi et al >> >> Great to continue another part of our strategy-in-the-making! My >> reasons why I feel we need a regional EU chapter and its consequences >> below. >> >> As with many international organisations I am a supporter of the >> strategy-adagio ; plan global, act local. >> >> This enables local flavours to an overall >> vision-mission-strategy-story. (Even Coca Cola encourages local >> initiatives under a global brand and growth strategy.) Which addresses >> the fact that, for example the GeoServer project, has many >> region/country specific implementations and add-ons. Just think of the >> specific European INSPIRE directive, with special plugins for >> metadata etc. >> >> Furthermore, outreach and lobby (see the Concept Marketing discussion >> in the Wiki) have to deal with a host of different cultures and >> political entities in Europe. Unlike a relatively homogenous US >> marketplace. Most notably we have a influential/powerful centralised >> EU government in Brussels as a pan-national stakeholder. >> >> Now, local chapters could be invited to localise our overall strategic >> roadmap (I happily take my analogy from software). But they are either >> not set up or not equipped to deal with this matter (compare our >> similar efforts on .org level). And they are certainly not able to >> influence European/Brussels policy from their relative distance. >> >> If a European OSGeo.eu can be the collaborative entity to work towards >> further open spatial dissemination, on this side of the >> Atlantic, then I am all for this. It could also facilitate FOSS4GEU >> in stead of having a local chapter carry the weight. It is a >> European itch, so lets scratch it ourselves. >> And if Africa and Asia and Middle-East have >> other dissemination needs than power to them. >> >> From an OSGeo-organisational point of view, we will certainly have to >> look into the overall governance. In my opinion we are in a phase in >> which we step up our game, professionalise, re-group and re-organise >> where required. However, splitting would be disastrous. >> >> A simple solution is that board representation is based on certain >> roles and representatives: >> Chair, Secretary and Treasurer: General roles, therefor voted by all >> chapter members >> For marketing, sponsoring (single/grouped) etc; also individuals >> voted by all >> Representative EU: voted by EU chapter members >> Representative Asia: voted by Asian chapter >> These last two roles could be combined with other specific roles if >> needed. >> >> Regional Chapters to be voted on by the local chapters in the area. >> Or such like. >> Yes, a little more of a Christmas tree, but that can be solved. It >> reflects a need for required change. >> >> The overall issue is that we grow in depth, width and length and >> therefore we need to revisit/rethink how the organisation is managed >> for future growth and relevance. >> And managing large internationally distributed organisations is an >> art, a craft and a profession. Especially if the organisation consists >> of critical, vocal and engaged volunteers. >> That can be daunting for those involved, but working in open source >> throws us much larger daunting challenges on a daily basis. >> >> My two (Euro)cents >> >> Cheers Marc >> >> Op dinsdag 3 mei 2016 heeft Massimiliano Cannata >> <massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch [6]> het volgende geschreven: >> >>> Dear Dirk and all, >>> I came across the e...@list.osgeo.org which I didnt know the >>> existence before of your last message. The archive [1] is showing >>> very low traffic (2 thread, one of 2015 and one of 2016) with few >>> contributors to the discussions (3 people). >>> In my opinion times are very immature for creating an OSGeo-EU; it >>> seems to me that the discussion just started. >>> >>> Apart from visions and perspective which could be different, im >>> concerned about the creation of an European OSGeo chapter and maybe >>> in the next future of an Asian one. >>> To my point of View, this may be the start of a disruption process >>> which could lead to to the creation of multiple regional >>> foundations. >>> >>> I have to say that I was already reluctant on the formation of North >>> American chapter for the same reason. >>> >>> This structure is one option, but then I see the "international >>> OSGeo" (now OSGeo only) to be totally redesigned in the case. >>> >>> Probably each continent should then elect one/two representatives >>> for the "international OSGeo" and each "continental chapter" will >>> have their members and their rules that scale down to "national >>> local chapters" that have their own rules and members and elects >>> representatives for the continental chapter. >>> >>> Also each "continental" will have its annual conference and the >>> International could happen once every two years. >>> >>> Said that, I have no recipe and while understanding the motivation >>> behind this disruption process I have some fear of splitting >>> communities. This may lead in the future to different incubation >>> processes, visions strategies etc... >>> >>> If this is the selected "option" I which that the process of >>> de-localization could be run in a more democratic way - doocracy is >>> good but when important matters involves several people democracy is >>> far way better as it explicitly involve everyone, not only those who >>> " tends to favor the more vocal people, leaving the "general >>> opinion" largely unknown." >>> >>> So my question (with no prejudices) is, are we going toward and do >>> we seek for a different OSGeo scenario? >>> >>> Maxi >>> >>> [1] >> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/European-Union-Chapter-f5250537.html >>> [5] >>> >>> Sorry if I garbled my understanding of the initial email, I did ask >>> for clarification :P >>> >>> -- >>> Jody Garnett >>> >>> On 2 May 2016 at 12:23, Massimiliano Cannata >>> <massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Board Members, >>>> while I understand the call for presentation for the OSGeo vision, >>>> regarding FOSS4G Europe, i see different visions within the >>>> community. >>>> >>>> One things is the EU local chapter, another is the FOSS4G local >>>> event which has a different vision in my understanding and my >>>> opinion. >>>> >>>> What is your opinion? >>>> >>>> Maxi >>>> >>>> 2016-05-02 17:56 GMT+02:00 Jody Garnett <jody.garn...@gmail.com>: >>>> >>>>> Thanks Till: >>>>> >>>>> I see that the presentation covering our mission/vision/goals >>>>> has been accepted [1] - perhaps that can take some pressure of >>>>> keynotes? I would appreciate company if Maxi (who has been doing >>>>> so much planning work) was willing. >>>>> >>>>> To clarify point two - are you considering a european foss4g >>>>> event? Or a vision for how OSGeo can be effective in Europe. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Jody Garnett >>>>> >>>>>> On 2 May 2016 at 11:19, <till.ad...@fossgis.de> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear OSGeo board, >>>>>> >>>>>> I come to you in sight of OSGeo presence @FOSS4G 2016 in >>>>>> Bonn. After sending out the accteptance-emails for the >>>>>> proposals for the regular track we now also care heavily about >>>>>> all the other programme related issues. >>>>>> >>>>>> One thing we want to finalize ASAP are the plenary >>>>>> talks/sessions we will have. >>>>>> >>>>>> We would be very pleased, if we could have two presentations >>>>>> from OSGeo within the limits of our plenary sessions: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Traditionally the OSGeo president should run the Sol Katz >>>>>> Award session as well as the student awardings - both together >>>>>> in the closing session. So we would be happy if Venka would >>>>>> agree in adopting that. This would be on friday afternoon, >>>>>> the detailed time schedule will come soon. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. In order to have both, a presentation of OSGeos new >>>>>> "Vision and Mission" but also to present the "Vision of an >>>>>> European FOSS4G" I would like to ask kindly whether >>>>>> Vice-President Dirk Frigne wants to talk about this in a >>>>>> keynote on wednesday noon. I think especially on an european >>>>>> FOSS4G with a lot of european organisations being advocated, >>>>>> showing the vision of a worldwide, but also of an european >>>>>> FOSS4G makes a lot of sense. Dirk as a Vice-President is the >>>>>> perfect person to combine both talks into one. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please also consider organizing the OSGeo booth, for >>>>>> questions just contact me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Till >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> 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 [2] >>>> >>>> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09 [3] >>>> >>>> massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch >>>> >>>> www.supsi.ch/ist [4] >> >> -- >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Marc Vloemans >> >> Mobile +31(0)651 844262 >> LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans [7] >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans [8] >> http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans [9] >> >> >> >> Links: >> ------ >> [1] http://2016.foss4g.org/talks.html#306 >> [2] http://www.fossgis.de/tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2014 >> [3] http://www.fossgis.de/tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2009 >> [4] http://www.supsi.ch/ist >> [5] http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/European-Union-Chapter-f5250537.html >> [6] mailto:massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch >> [7] http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans >> [8] http://twitter.com/marcvloemans >> [9] http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans > _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss