Sorry, but I must say that I agree a bit with Bruce. I sometimes get the feeling, while following discussions on here from the point of view of only an ordinary basic mapper, that it's all intended for a much higher level of participant, or (dare I say) "experts" / mapping professionals?
Thanks Graeme On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 16:42, Bruce Bannerman < bruce.bannerman.os...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well said John. > > I personally have not seen much community engagement (until recently, that > is) that would have justified increased participation by myself. > > I also feel uncomfortable with the way Osgeo Oceania Community members are > described and defined. That is why I personally have not bothered with > applying to be a voting member. > > I prefer a more open community, where anyone can subscribe and regard > themselves as a ‘member’ of the community. > > I don’t like the approach where anyone can send an email and request to > become a ‘member’, which also means that they can vote in elections for the > board. > > I much prefer our parent organisation’s model, where people need to be > nominated based on their positive contributions to the community, and then > be accepted by charter member vote, prior to being eligible to vote for the > board, or other Charter Members. > > I believe that the current ‘member’ model adopted by OSGeo Oceania is > driven more by ASIC requirements, and less by good open source community > practices. The current model is ripe for misuse, abuse and the equivalent > of branch stacking. > > > I recall that this has been discussed in the past, but in the light of > recent discussions, I suggest that it may be beneficial for the community > to revisit what it means to be an OO ‘member’. > > Kind regards, > > Bruce > > > , > > On 15 Dec 2020, at 16:00, John Bryant <johnwbry...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > My feeling is that voter participation is probably closely linked to > general community engagement. If we set engagement as a priority for OSGeo > Oceania, I think we'll see participation improve over time. > > Some things I'd support, towards this end: > > - Support local groups, local events, local initiatives. Articulate > the parameters of a grant program, invite applications, and put the funds > of the organisation to work. > - Continue to open up the organisation to more people, by making it > easy for people to follow along and find out where they want to contribute. > Commit to transparency, make board & working group meetings open-invitation > wherever possible, write clear and simple terms of reference and keep them > up to date, use open 2-way channels of communication. > > Andrew's suggestion for a gentle reminder that voting is required could > help. I agree the comms were good. > > Regarding removing people from the membership register: this idea was > driven by our old constitution, which said we needed 20% of the members > present at a General Meeting, which is very difficult if the member list is > largely inactive. This year's AGM wouldn't have met quorum under those > rules. When OO adopted the current constitution, this changed to "the lower > of 20% of the Membership or 10 Members", easier to achieve, so it's less > critical to keep the list from getting stale. > > It still feels OK to me to use this method to trim the list when people > become inactive, but I suggest doing it gently - ask members if they want > to stay on, rather than just drop them. > > Cheers > John > > On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 12:36, Martin Tomko <tom...@unimelb.edu.au> wrote: > >> One more comment – we could see how many people that registered used >> “company” emails. >> >> If people change jobs, these may become not available, or at least not >> checked ( and you do not get a bounce email, sometimes). >> >> >> >> Second, this is not a year to draw conclusion based on. People simply >> have no energy for most things, and if there was no conference, they may >> not have felt involved. We did not remind them that if they do not vote 2 >> years in a row they may become inactive… >> >> >> >> So I would not be too harsh on ourselves. I also perceive the mothership >> OSGeo differently to our local org. They are for me not primarily the >> community organising body ( = conference), but the one that coordinates and >> maintains the lives of the member software projects. Hence, there is a >> different level of activity and expectations, that do not get perceived as >> “dormant” in a year without a conference. Arguably, we do not have this >> second leg to stand on in OO. >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> >> >> *From: *Oceania <oceania-boun...@lists.osgeo.org> >> *Date: *Tuesday, 15 December 2020 at 3:28 pm >> *To: *Alex Leith <alexgle...@gmail.com> >> *Cc: *OSgeo - Oceania <oceania@lists.osgeo.org> >> *Subject: *Re: [OSGeo Oceania] Fwd: [Charter-members] 2020 OSGeo Board >> of Directors election results >> >> Hi Alex, >> >> >> >> Wow - I missed that in the AGM recording... I wonder if this is a >> hangover of the initial excitement of the OO org getting off the ground, in >> that people were signing up for a membership without understanding the >> requirements of having to vote in the elections? >> >> >> >> I think you mentioned in a previous email that the membership clause >> states something along the lines of members who do not participate in two >> consecutive elections are deemed to be inactive and are removed from the >> membership register. Maybe now that we have had two elections, that process >> will kick in and improve the completion rate by removing inactive members? >> Because I would hope that more than 40% of the membership is active. >> >> >> >> For what it is worth I thought the communication for this election was >> good, but maybe I just happened to be on the right channels. I do have two >> suggestions for increasing voter turnout, and a caveat here is I'm not sure >> how practical these are: >> >> >> >> 1. A gentle reminder to those who did not vote that the membership comes >> with some expectations and one of those is that they participate in the >> OSGeo Oceania elections. >> >> 2. I'm not sure if MailChimp can do this maybe next year we could send an >> appointment or calendar invite with a link to the voting page, thus >> creating a mechanism in people own calendars to be reminded? >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 11:51 AM Alex Leith <alexgle...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Forwarding because we talked about the voter turnout at our AGM. >> >> OSGeo has 64% participation, compared to our ~40%. >> >> >> >> Any ideas on how we can increase this? >> >> >> >> One difference is that to become a charter member of OSGeo, you need to >> be recommended, so more 'exclusive'! >> >> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> From: *Jorge Gustavo Rocha* <j...@osgeopt.pt> >> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 10:11 >> Subject: [Charter-members] 2020 OSGeo Board of Directors election results >> To: OSGeo Charter members <charter-memb...@lists.osgeo.org> >> Cc: Board <bo...@lists.osgeo.org>, OSGeo Chief Returning Officer < >> c...@osgeo.org> >> >> >> >> Dear OSGeo members and friends, >> >> Thanks to all candidates for going through the election process and >> thank you all for your participation in this election. >> >> These are the results from the 2020 elections for the 4 open seats on >> the OSGeo Board of Directors. >> >> The results in alphabetical order are: >> >> * Angelos Tzotsos >> * Michael Smith >> * Michele Tobias >> * Tom Kralidis >> >> Election figures are: >> >> * 306 votes out of 482 >> * 63% participation >> >> All candidates received a large number of votes recognizing their >> engaged in our community. >> >> Detailed number of votes for each candidate were published on the OSGeo >> wiki [1]. >> >> Jorge Gustavo Rocha and Anne Ghisla >> (your 2020 OSGeo Elections CROs) >> >> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Election_2020_Results >> _______________________________________________ >> Charter-members mailing list >> charter-memb...@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/charter-members >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Alex Leith >> >> m: 0419189050 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oceania mailing list >> Oceania@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oceania mailing list >> Oceania@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania >> > _______________________________________________ > Oceania mailing list > Oceania@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania > > _______________________________________________ > Oceania mailing list > Oceania@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania >
_______________________________________________ Oceania mailing list Oceania@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania