Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter members

[Peter Baumann]

Cameron & all,

a lot of serious, involved work is going on on this thread; however, some core 
issues which I tried to phrase, but Steven (Feldman) expressed much crisper, 
still remain unaddressed by the currently voted proposal:


 * Inclusiveness
 * Democracy
 * Growth
 * Openness

The proposal as it stands is in high danger of establishing a self-sustaining 
oligarchy.


I am concerned that a body that claims to have international impact (through 
project branding) high responsibility must be exercised in terms of 
transparency, openness, and democratic principles.


-Peter



On 06/29/2014 10:26 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:

OSGeo board,
In the interests of making a decision such that Jorge Salinas (our CRO) can 
move forward, I propose the following process be followed for voting new 
charter members in 2014:


1. Charter member to nominate potential new charter member(s) (as before).

2. Charter members then vote (in/out) nominated charter members. This will be 
different to prior years, as we previously voted in a fixed number of members 
for a larger selection pool. (eg vote in 20 people from a list of 30). For 
this year, I propose we have a "Yes/No" vote. Ie, if we have a list of 30 
candidates, we will ask all charter members to vote Yes or No against each 
candidate. Each candidate with greater than 50% of YES votes will be included 
as new charter members.


3. Charter members would be guided to select candidates who fit the "Positive 
Attributes for Charter Members" as defined here: 
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process#Positive_Attributes


4. There will be no limit to the number of new charter members who can be 
selected. This will require an update of 
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process


5. Note: This vote is being put to the board and not to charter members as I 
don't wish to complicate this decision by adding a 2nd (positive) idea for 
change. We can address getting charter members to vote on issues as a separate 
motion.


Board members, can you please all vote on above:

+1 Cameron



On 25/06/2014 9:31 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:
Following the community discussion, I further researched OSGeo's foundation 
documents, (in retrospect I should have done this earlier).


Of particular relevance to current discussion is our ByLaws:

http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/incorporation/bylaws.html
/Section 7.1. Admission of [Charter] Members. An initial group of up to 
forty-five (45) persons shall be admitted as the initial [charter] members of 
the corporation upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Directors of the 
corporation. Thereafter, to be eligible for [charter] membership, a person 
must be nominated by an existing [charter] member of the corporation pursuant 
to a written document in such form as shall be adopted by the Board of 
Directors from time to time. The nomination must be included in a notice to 
the [charter] members at least ten (10) days in advance of the meeting at 
which the [charter] members will vote on the applicant's admission. Proposed 
[charter] members shall be admitted upon the affirmative vote of the members 
of the corporation./


This section implies that the proposal below of automatically accepting 
"Recognised OSGeo Community Leaders" is unconstitutional, as charter members 
need to be voted into the role by existing charter members.


It also implies that while a separate paid membership category could be 
created, paid members would still need to be voted into a charter member role 
by existing charter members.


The ByLaws don't mention limiting the number of new charter members. This 
criteria seems to have been introduced as a Membership Process by the 26th 
Board meeting:

http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process
/The number of new members will be between 10% and one third of the existing 
charter membership count as decided by the board/.


Such a statement created by the board, could be updated by the board, and as 
such the board could agree to accept an unlimited number of new charter members.


So I'm now thinking that our election process can be simplified to:

1. Charter member to nominate potential new charter member(s)
2. Charter members then vote (in/out) against all nominated charter members
A suitable criteria for determining whether a nominee qualifies is listed 
here: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process#Positive_Attributes

4. Nominees with a majority of votes are included as new Charter Members

On 15/06/2014 9:52 am, Cameron Shorter wrote:
Within 2 weeks we intend to start our annual process for selecting new OSGeo 
charter members.


In previous years the Charter Member selection process has been a little 
contentious. We typically receive numerous nominations from high caliber 
members of our community, and insufficient positions to accept them all. 
This typically results in unnecessary disappointment and dissent.


In response, the OSGeo board has agreed to trial tweaking the voting 
pr

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter members

[Bart van den Eijnden]

Hey Peter,

so what would be your suggestions to make the process more of the 4 bullet 
points you mentioned?

Best regards,
Bart

On 30 Jun 2014, at 09:24, Peter Baumann  wrote:

> Cameron & all,
> 
> a lot of serious, involved work is going on on this thread; however, some 
> core issues which I tried to phrase, but Steven (Feldman) expressed much 
> crisper, still remain unaddressed by the currently voted proposal:
> Inclusiveness
> Democracy
> Growth
> Openness
> The proposal as it stands is in high danger of establishing a self-sustaining 
> oligarchy. 
> 
> I am concerned that a body that claims to have international impact (through 
> project branding) high responsibility must be exercised in terms of 
> transparency, openness, and democratic principles. 
> 
> -Peter
> 
> 
> 
> On 06/29/2014 10:26 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>> OSGeo board,
>> In the interests of making a decision such that Jorge Salinas (our CRO) can 
>> move forward, I propose the following process be followed for voting new 
>> charter members in 2014:
>> 
>> 1. Charter member to nominate potential new charter member(s) (as before).
>> 
>> 2. Charter members then vote (in/out) nominated charter members. This will 
>> be different to prior years, as we previously voted in a fixed number of 
>> members for a larger selection pool. (eg vote in 20 people from a list of 
>> 30). For this year, I propose we have a "Yes/No" vote. Ie, if we have a list 
>> of 30 candidates, we will ask all charter members to vote Yes or No against 
>> each candidate. Each candidate with greater than 50% of YES votes will be 
>> included as new charter members.
>> 
>> 3. Charter members would be guided to select candidates who fit the 
>> "Positive Attributes for Charter Members" as defined here: 
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process#Positive_Attributes
>> 
>> 4. There will be no limit to the number of new charter members who can be 
>> selected. This will require an update of 
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process
>> 
>> 5. Note: This vote is being put to the board and not to charter members as I 
>> don't wish to complicate this decision by adding a 2nd (positive) idea for 
>> change. We can address getting charter members to vote on issues as a 
>> separate motion.
>> 
>> Board members, can you please all vote on above:
>> 
>> +1 Cameron
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 25/06/2014 9:31 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>> Following the community discussion, I further researched OSGeo's foundation 
>>> documents, (in retrospect I should have done this earlier).
>>> 
>>> Of particular relevance to current discussion is our ByLaws:
>>> 
>>> http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/incorporation/bylaws.html
>>> Section 7.1. Admission of [Charter] Members. An initial group of up to 
>>> forty-five (45) persons shall be admitted as the initial [charter] members 
>>> of the corporation upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Directors of 
>>> the corporation. Thereafter, to be eligible for [charter] membership, a 
>>> person must be nominated by an existing [charter] member of the corporation 
>>> pursuant to a written document in such form as shall be adopted by the 
>>> Board of Directors from time to time. The nomination must be included in a 
>>> notice to the [charter] members at least ten (10) days in advance of the 
>>> meeting at which the [charter] members will vote on the applicant’s 
>>> admission. Proposed [charter] members shall be admitted upon the 
>>> affirmative vote of the members of the corporation.
>>> 
>>> This section implies that the proposal below of automatically accepting 
>>> "Recognised OSGeo Community Leaders" is unconstitutional, as charter 
>>> members need to be voted into the role by existing charter members.
>>> 
>>> It also implies that while a separate paid membership category could be 
>>> created, paid members would still need to be voted into a charter member 
>>> role by existing charter members.
>>> 
>>> The ByLaws don't mention limiting the number of new charter members. This 
>>> criteria seems to have been introduced as a Membership Process by the 26th 
>>> Board meeting:
>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process
>>> The number of new members will be between 10% and one third of the existing 
>>> charter membership count as decided by the board.
>>> 
>>> Such a statement created by the board, could be updated by the board, and 
>>> as such the board could agree to accept an unlimited number of new charter 
>>> members.
>>> 
>>> So I'm now thinking that our election process can be simplified to:
>>> 
>>> 1. Charter member to nominate potential new charter member(s)
>>> 2. Charter members then vote (in/out) against all nominated charter members
>>> A suitable criteria for determining whether a nominee qualifies is listed 
>>> here: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process#Positive_Attributes
>>> 4. Nominees with a majority of votes are included as new Charter Members
>>> 
>>> On 15/06/2014 9:52 am, Came

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter members

[Even Rouault]

Selon Bart van den Eijnden :

> Hey Peter,
>
> so what would be your suggestions to make the process more of the 4 bullet
> points you mentioned?

Not answering on behalf of Peter, but a potential idea to solve those issues
would be to combine Cameron proposal of a yes/no vote on each nominee + allow
people to self-nominate them (as you do in political elections). That should
help solving the "self-sustaining oligarchy"
We could add a rule that a self-nominee must at least be seconded by at least X
charter member(s). Such a rule would not particuarly shoking to avoid unrelevant
candidates (e.g. in France to be candidate to the presidential election you must
have at least support from at least 500 already elected persons : mayors,
deputies, etc... But such a rule is regularly contested by "small" candidates.)
Or we could not make it a rule, but allow charter members to express their
support for the candidature of a self-nominee.

At least, this would help solving the following 2 problems of our current
process :
- people that are excluded because noone thought of nominating them
- people that are excluded because of the limited number of new members
(although that has not been a practical problem the last 2 years since all
nominees have been accepted)

I think OSGeo already works in an open and transparent way. The point of
democracy is perhaps to be better adressed, but there is a subtle balance to
find between oligarchy and a too big dilution of the values. In a democracy you
always have rules to define who can be elected and who can vote.

Even

>
> Best regards,
> Bart
>
> On 30 Jun 2014, at 09:24, Peter Baumann 
> wrote:
>
> > Cameron & all,
> >
> > a lot of serious, involved work is going on on this thread; however, some
> core issues which I tried to phrase, but Steven (Feldman) expressed much
> crisper, still remain unaddressed by the currently voted proposal:
> > Inclusiveness
> > Democracy
> > Growth
> > Openness
> > The proposal as it stands is in high danger of establishing a
> self-sustaining oligarchy.
> >
> > I am concerned that a body that claims to have international impact
> (through project branding) high responsibility must be exercised in terms of
> transparency, openness, and democratic principles.
> >
> > -Peter
> >
> >
> >
> > On 06/29/2014 10:26 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> >> OSGeo board,
> >> In the interests of making a decision such that Jorge Salinas (our CRO)
> can move forward, I propose the following process be followed for voting new
> charter members in 2014:
> >>
> >> 1. Charter member to nominate potential new charter member(s) (as before).
> >>
> >> 2. Charter members then vote (in/out) nominated charter members. This will
> be different to prior years, as we previously voted in a fixed number of
> members for a larger selection pool. (eg vote in 20 people from a list of
> 30). For this year, I propose we have a "Yes/No" vote. Ie, if we have a list
> of 30 candidates, we will ask all charter members to vote Yes or No against
> each candidate. Each candidate with greater than 50% of YES votes will be
> included as new charter members.
> >>
> >> 3. Charter members would be guided to select candidates who fit the
> "Positive Attributes for Charter Members" as defined here:
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process#Positive_Attributes
> >>
> >> 4. There will be no limit to the number of new charter members who can be
> selected. This will require an update of
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process
> >>
> >> 5. Note: This vote is being put to the board and not to charter members as
> I don't wish to complicate this decision by adding a 2nd (positive) idea for
> change. We can address getting charter members to vote on issues as a
> separate motion.
> >>
> >> Board members, can you please all vote on above:
> >>
> >> +1 Cameron
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 25/06/2014 9:31 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> >>> Following the community discussion, I further researched OSGeo's
> foundation documents, (in retrospect I should have done this earlier).
> >>>
> >>> Of particular relevance to current discussion is our ByLaws:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/incorporation/bylaws.html
> >>> Section 7.1. Admission of [Charter] Members. An initial group of up to
> forty-five (45) persons shall be admitted as the initial [charter] members of
> the corporation upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Directors of the
> corporation. Thereafter, to be eligible for [charter] membership, a person
> must be nominated by an existing [charter] member of the corporation pursuant
> to a written document in such form as shall be adopted by the Board of
> Directors from time to time. The nomination must be included in a notice to
> the [charter] members at least ten (10) days in advance of the meeting at
> which the [charter] members will vote on the applicant’s admission. Proposed
> [charter] members shall be admitted upon the affirmative vote of the members
> of the corporati

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter members

[Peter Baumann]

Hi Bart,

what I have in mind is the following (but for sure not the only possible way):
- have a well-defined membership status (registered on OSGeo list, paid 
membership, whatever other criterion)

- have 2 rounds of election:
* everybody (=members, or even outsiders) can suggest anybody from 
membership (ie, members "in good standing", such as fees paid, if applicable)

* from that list, membership elects with simple majority
- elected seats are valid until next election (maybe 2 years, to decrease the 
election effort required)
- accepted and incubating projects get one extra seat each, reflecting the 
impact OSGeo is exercising on them. However, these should always be (strictly) 
less than 50% of the overall seats so that projects alone can never dominate 
over the group of elected persons.


So this above is a brief sketch, attempting to accommodate:
- democracy, opennness, inclusiveness
- the perceived need to have projects represented

cheers,
Peter


On 06/30/2014 09:27 AM, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:

Hey Peter,

so what would be your suggestions to make the process more of the 4 bullet 
points you mentioned?


Best regards,
Bart

On 30 Jun 2014, at 09:24, Peter Baumann > wrote:



Cameron & all,

a lot of serious, involved work is going on on this thread; however, some 
core issues which I tried to phrase, but Steven (Feldman) expressed much 
crisper, still remain unaddressed by the currently voted proposal:


  * Inclusiveness
  * Democracy
  * Growth
  * Openness

The proposal as it stands is in high danger of establishing a self-sustaining 
oligarchy.


I am concerned that a body that claims to have international impact (through 
project branding) high responsibility must be exercised in terms of 
transparency, openness, and democratic principles.


-Peter



On 06/29/2014 10:26 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:

OSGeo board,
In the interests of making a decision such that Jorge Salinas (our CRO) can 
move forward, I propose the following process be followed for voting new 
charter members in 2014:


1. Charter member to nominate potential new charter member(s) (as before).

2. Charter members then vote (in/out) nominated charter members. This will 
be different to prior years, as we previously voted in a fixed number of 
members for a larger selection pool. (eg vote in 20 people from a list of 
30). For this year, I propose we have a "Yes/No" vote. Ie, if we have a list 
of 30 candidates, we will ask all charter members to vote Yes or No against 
each candidate. Each candidate with greater than 50% of YES votes will be 
included as new charter members.


3. Charter members would be guided to select candidates who fit the 
"Positive Attributes for Charter Members" as defined here: 
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process#Positive_Attributes


4. There will be no limit to the number of new charter members who can be 
selected. This will require an update of 
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Membership_Process


5. Note: This vote is being put to the board and not to charter members as I 
don't wish to complicate this decision by adding a 2nd (positive) idea for 
change. We can address getting charter members to vote on issues as a 
separate motion.


Board members, can you please all vote on above:

+1 Cameron



On 25/06/2014 9:31 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:
Following the community discussion, I further researched OSGeo's foundation 
documents, (in retrospect I should have done this earlier).


Of particular relevance to current discussion is our ByLaws:

http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/incorporation/bylaws.html
/Section 7.1. Admission of [Charter] Members. An initial group of up to 
forty-five (45) persons shall be admitted as the initial [charter] members 
of the corporation upon the affirmative vote of the Board of Directors of 
the corporation. Thereafter, to be eligible for [charter] membership, a 
person must be nominated by an existing [charter] member of the corporation 
pursuant to a written document in such form as shall be adopted by the 
Board of Directors from time to time. The nomination must be included in a 
notice to the [charter] members at least ten (10) days in advance of the 
meeting at which the [charter] members will vote on the applicant’s 
admission. Proposed [charter] members shall be admitted upon the 
affirmative vote of the members of the corporation./


This section implies that the proposal below of automatically accepting 
"Recognised OSGeo Community Leaders" is unconstitutional, as charter 
members need to be voted into the role by existing charter members.


It also implies that while a separate paid membership category could be 
created, paid members would still need to be voted into a charter member 
role by existing charter members.


The ByLaws don't mention limiting the number of new charter members. This 
criteria seems to have been introduced as a Membership Process by the 26th 
Board meeting:

http://wi

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter members

[Steven Feldman]

If we want to avoid "establishing a self-sustaining oligarchy” then perhaps we 
need to consider ways of becoming a mass membership organisation rather than 
one governed by a self selecting elite group.

Should we consider separating the Charter Members who could continue to be 
acknowledged for their contributions to OSGeo (but maybe by the whole 
membership not just existing Charter Members) from the process of voting for 
the board? If we want to be open and inclusive we need to empower a larger 
group of contributors to vote for the people who set policy and manage our 
organisation. Perhaps it could be a requirement for board membership that 
candidates have already been voted as charter members by the wider membership.

We could go for something like the OSM Foundation where membership at £15/yr 
entitles you to vote for the Foundation Board or we could go for a free 
membership category with some qualifying criteria.
__
Steven


On 30 Jun 2014, at 09:58, board-requ...@lists.osgeo.org wrote:

> From: Bart van den Eijnden 
> Subject: Re: [Board] [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo 
> charter members
> Date: 30 June 2014 08:27:08 BST
> To: Peter Baumann 
> Cc: discuss@lists.osgeo.org, "bo...@lists.osgeo.org" 
> 
> 
> Hey Peter,
> 
> so what would be your suggestions to make the process more of the 4 bullet 
> points you mentioned?
> 
> Best regards,
> Bart
> 
> On 30 Jun 2014, at 09:24, Peter Baumann  
> wrote:
> 
>> Cameron & all,
>> 
>> a lot of serious, involved work is going on on this thread; however, some 
>> core issues which I tried to phrase, but Steven (Feldman) expressed much 
>> crisper, still remain unaddressed by the currently voted proposal:
>> Inclusiveness
>> Democracy
>> Growth
>> Openness
>> The proposal as it stands is in high danger of establishing a 
>> self-sustaining oligarchy. 
>> 
>> I am concerned that a body that claims to have international impact (through 
>> project branding) high responsibility must be exercised in terms of 
>> transparency, openness, and democratic principles. 
>> 
>> -Peter
>> 

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter members

[Bart van den Eijnden]

Board members need to be charter members already:

http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Election_Procedure

Best regards,
Bart

On 30 Jun 2014, at 12:34, Steven Feldman  wrote:

> If we want to avoid "establishing a self-sustaining oligarchy” then perhaps 
> we need to consider ways of becoming a mass membership organisation rather 
> than one governed by a self selecting elite group.
> 
> Should we consider separating the Charter Members who could continue to be 
> acknowledged for their contributions to OSGeo (but maybe by the whole 
> membership not just existing Charter Members) from the process of voting for 
> the board? If we want to be open and inclusive we need to empower a larger 
> group of contributors to vote for the people who set policy and manage our 
> organisation. Perhaps it could be a requirement for board membership that 
> candidates have already been voted as charter members by the wider membership.
> 
> We could go for something like the OSM Foundation where membership at £15/yr 
> entitles you to vote for the Foundation Board or we could go for a free 
> membership category with some qualifying criteria.
> __
> Steven
> 
> 
> On 30 Jun 2014, at 09:58, board-requ...@lists.osgeo.org wrote:
> 
>> From: Bart van den Eijnden 
>> Subject: Re: [Board] [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo 
>> charter members
>> Date: 30 June 2014 08:27:08 BST
>> To: Peter Baumann 
>> Cc: discuss@lists.osgeo.org, "bo...@lists.osgeo.org" 
>> 
>> 
>> Hey Peter,
>> 
>> so what would be your suggestions to make the process more of the 4 bullet 
>> points you mentioned?
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Bart
>> 
>> On 30 Jun 2014, at 09:24, Peter Baumann  
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Cameron & all,
>>> 
>>> a lot of serious, involved work is going on on this thread; however, some 
>>> core issues which I tried to phrase, but Steven (Feldman) expressed much 
>>> crisper, still remain unaddressed by the currently voted proposal:
>>> Inclusiveness
>>> Democracy
>>> Growth
>>> Openness
>>> The proposal as it stands is in high danger of establishing a 
>>> self-sustaining oligarchy. 
>>> 
>>> I am concerned that a body that claims to have international impact 
>>> (through project branding) high responsibility must be exercised in terms 
>>> of transparency, openness, and democratic principles. 
>>> 
>>> -Peter
>>> 
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter members

[Steven Feldman]

Apologies, typo on my part, should have read:

> Perhaps it could CONTINUE TO be a requirement for board membership that 
> candidates have already been voted as charter members by the wider membership
__
Steven


On 30 Jun 2014, at 12:04, Bart van den Eijnden  wrote:

> Board members need to be charter members already:
> 
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Election_Procedure
> 
> Best regards,
> Bart
> 
> On 30 Jun 2014, at 12:34, Steven Feldman  wrote:
> 
>> If we want to avoid "establishing a self-sustaining oligarchy” then perhaps 
>> we need to consider ways of becoming a mass membership organisation rather 
>> than one governed by a self selecting elite group.
>> 
>> Should we consider separating the Charter Members who could continue to be 
>> acknowledged for their contributions to OSGeo (but maybe by the whole 
>> membership not just existing Charter Members) from the process of voting for 
>> the board? If we want to be open and inclusive we need to empower a larger 
>> group of contributors to vote for the people who set policy and manage our 
>> organisation. Perhaps it could be a requirement for board membership that 
>> candidates have already been voted as charter members by the wider 
>> membership.
>> 
>> We could go for something like the OSM Foundation where membership at £15/yr 
>> entitles you to vote for the Foundation Board or we could go for a free 
>> membership category with some qualifying criteria.
>> __
>> Steven
>> 
>> 
>> On 30 Jun 2014, at 09:58, board-requ...@lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>> 
>>> From: Bart van den Eijnden 
>>> Subject: Re: [Board] [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo 
>>> charter members
>>> Date: 30 June 2014 08:27:08 BST
>>> To: Peter Baumann 
>>> Cc: discuss@lists.osgeo.org, "bo...@lists.osgeo.org" 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hey Peter,
>>> 
>>> so what would be your suggestions to make the process more of the 4 bullet 
>>> points you mentioned?
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Bart
>>> 
>>> On 30 Jun 2014, at 09:24, Peter Baumann  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 Cameron & all,
 
 a lot of serious, involved work is going on on this thread; however, some 
 core issues which I tried to phrase, but Steven (Feldman) expressed much 
 crisper, still remain unaddressed by the currently voted proposal:
 Inclusiveness
 Democracy
 Growth
 Openness
 The proposal as it stands is in high danger of establishing a 
 self-sustaining oligarchy. 
 
 I am concerned that a body that claims to have international impact 
 (through project branding) high responsibility must be exercised in terms 
 of transparency, openness, and democratic principles. 
 
 -Peter
 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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