Hi Max, On Wed, 2019-06-05 at 09:26 +0800, Max via foundation-list wrote: > We are all volunteer live in different time zone, we have real job > and life. So we will do community task at rest time of real life. > It's good to do community task in reasonable time. > I think ask question to candidates during the election time -- we > might be see how busy they are in real life. > To guess how much time the candidates could spend on community > tasks. > If someone is real great but he / she is 100% or 90% busy in real > life, she / he might be have no time to help.
Serving on the board is a form of volunteering your time to help the GNOME community. It comes with specific and quite predictable time commitments in terms of the board meetings, e-mails, etc that being a board member entails - usually around 2 hours a week, and usually at the same time each week. As Carlos points out, these are rarely urgent. The board has actually been trying to take a more "hands off" role - focusing on oversight, strategy, etc rather than day to day or urgent decisions. The Foundation now has 7 full-time staff and they should be able to dedicate far more time and be more responsive. So - provided the board candidate is able to dedicate these specific times, I don't think response time or availability to volunteer for additional things should necessarily be considered while assessing board candidates for election - if someone isn't available to volunteer for community tasks that doesn't mean they will be a bad board member. I hope in my case the opposite is true - I am very busy in my personal and professional life because I am on the leadership team of Endless, a company that works with GNOME - but this means I have experience as a director/executive which I think I can use to help the Foundation board set a good strategy and sensible policies, manage it's resources well, manage the ED, etc. Whether a board member takes on additional community/volunteering tasks (eg organising a conference, joining a committee, being an officer like secretary or treasurer, etc) is a separate decision. (I personally don't have a lot /more/ time to give, but when I do I choose to spend it on Flatpak/Flathub because I think the app ecosystem is a blocker to the Linux desktop's overall growth and impact.) Cheers,Rob > The date is for UTC +08:00 in my local time. > > * Philip Chimento: 2019/6/4 > * Christel Dahlskjaer: 2019/6/4 > * Benjamin Berg: 2019/6/4 > * Allan Day: 2019/6/4 > * Tristan Van Berkom: 2019/6/4 > * Carlos Soriano: 2019/6/4 > * Robert McQueen: 2019/6/5 > > * Britt Yazel > * Niels De Graef > * Federico Mena Quintero > * Christopher Davis > > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 4:55 AM Robert McQueen <ra...@gnome.org> > wrote: > > Hi Max, > > For what it's worth - I agree very strongly with Carlos here. The > > community seems very "latched on" to minutes as the only/best way > > to hear from or understand the board. I believe that on the whole > > Philip and Federico as Secretary and Vice-Secretary have been doing > > as good a job as could reasonably be expected of them, in terms of > > keeping the process running and making sure the minutes happen and > > are published within weeks rather than months. It's certainly as > > good or as close to as good as I've seen it during the past few > > years, and as a time-starved collection of volunteers, I don't > > think it's feasible for an incoming director to promise that the > > preparation of minutes will change significantly. > > That said; we hear the concerns about timeliness and transparency > > but really - poring over summarised board minutes looking for > > decisions (or conspiriacies) and second-guessing > > justifications/motivations is not a good way to build trust and > > transparency. Communication should be more intentional and > > directed, ideally the board should be more accessible. This is why > > I blogged about the key topics and things we were aiming to do from > > our hackfest last year. > > I think that Carlos' GitLab and Discourse suggestions are great, > > and maybe there are some other things we could consider - some > > round table / AMA things - so that the board is in discussion with > > the membership more frequently than the big Q&A "meet the new > > board" at GUADEC. At this exact time, the new board don't really > > know what they're doing (or about to do) - at least I certainly > > didn't - so you might get intentions/aspirations but very little > > insight into what is actually ongoing and why. > > (As a side point, I am also not used to the concept that a board or > > other panel would /not/ periodically approve it's previous minutes > > - but I would also not expect a board to ordinarily meet every two > > weeks. We've moved from weekly to bi-weekly meetings during this > > board term, which is great, but ideally as we build > > trust/process/oversight in the ED and staff, the board should > > ideally have to meet less often.) > > As the staff team grows, more of the "stuff the foundation does" > > should move away from the board making micro-decisions, and more > > towards "business as usual" for the staff. Then the reporting and > > transparency requirement moves from the board to the staff - > > especially as they are (by their very existence) consuming donor > > funds. So I feel this transparency is also very important. As the > > ED line manager, I think we've made some progress during this term > > and have converted some of Neil's reporting to the board into eg a > > blog post visible to the community, but clearer and more frequent > > updates on "what is the foundation doing" particularly through the > > activities of staff is something I would hope to be able to > > continue working on with Neil and his team over the coming year. > > Thanks,Rob > > On Tue, 2019-06-04 at 22:22 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote: > > > Hi Max, > > > Thanks for your question. You raise a very good point, I agree > > > with you that we need to improve participation of the community > > > on board topics, and it's specially difficult if the information > > > is delayed for too long. > > > > > > This is indeed a difficult situation. Some topics that the board > > > discusses are quite sensible, and sometimes we are in doubt > > > whether parts of it are private or not, so that requires > > > consensus and therefore delays happen. As you can imagine, we > > > rely on volunteer time to discuss and process them, and the > > > availability of each director and secretaries is limited. In all > > > honesty, while this can always be improved with our current > > > processes, I think Philip Chimento and Federico made an excellent > > > job with minutes. > > > > > > However, let me comment about the lack of participation. I think > > > one of the reasons is that minutes are simply not the best tool > > > for this. Minutes feel to me too much of a one way communication, > > > and on top of that they are over email, which is not the most > > > encouraging tool to manage and track discussions. They are good > > > for keeping a record, but not so good for much else. Improving > > > this situation was one of the reasons we moved our key > > > conversations to GitLab issues, so community members could > > > closely follow them and chime in directly if wanted. > > > > > > My vision to encourage more participation would be around using > > > more tooling such as GitLab and Discourse for board discussions, > > > and on top of that, keep pushing on our goal to put as early as > > > possible key initiatives there to allow members to actually > > > participate. I believe we have a big room to improve, specially > > > with initiatives that are not time sensible. > > > > > > Lastly, an interesting idea I think we could do is a round of > > > questions to the membership to know what topics they were > > > interested in and that we could have done better with their > > > minutes. Although I believe the board is always open to feedback, > > > I personally look forward to know about those. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Carlos Soriano > > > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 at 02:43, Max via foundation-list < > > > foundation-list@gnome.org> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > Thanks for running for the board. > > > > Thanks everyone who want take times to make GNOME better. > > > > Just a simple question about Minutes of the board meeting. > > > > > > > > Data and information might be different. > > > > For me - a GNOME foundation member > > > > > > > > Data - Get "Minutes of the board meeting" after 1 month or 2 > > > > weeks after. > > > > ---- Because maybe the event is already close or over. > > > > > > > > Information - Get "Minutes of the board meeting" in 1 week or > > > > 10 days. > > > > ---- Because something might be happening and everyone could > > > > discuss with board and reply. > > > > > > > > ==== Here is the question ==== > > > > > > > > Could you promise to think a way --- Everyone get "Minutes of > > > > the board meeting" in a very close time? > > > > > > > > Here is my suggestion. > > > > Maybe there will be a table to record the "Minutes of the board > > > > meeting" announcement time and does it announce in short time? > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > ----------------------- > > > > | board meeting | Minutes | in 10 days ? > > > > | > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > ----------------------- > > > > | 2019/4/29 | 2019/5/22 | No > > > > | > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > ----------------------- > > > > | 2019/4/8 | 2019/5/15 | No > > > > | > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > ----------------------- > > > > | 2019/3/13 | 2019/5/15 | No > > > > | > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > ----------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe it could be a record in GNOME annual report？ > > > > ---- There are ? % for Minutes of the board meeting on time to > > > > announce. > > > > > > > > I want to say --- It not just secretary task, It's the > > > > information we want to get from all GNOME Board member. > > > > > > > > Thanks again for all who take time to running the board > > > > > > > > > > > > Max > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > foundation-list mailing list > > > > > > > > foundation-list@gnome.org > > > > > > > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________foundation-list > > > mailing listfoundation-l...@gnome.org > > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > > _______________________________________________foundation-list > mailing listfoundation-l...@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
_______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
