Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] R: 2019 OSGeo UN Committee Educational Challenge
On 20/05/2019 07:03, Maria Antonia Brovelli wrote: Anyhow there is a Code of Conduct Committee. If they decided that the criteria as a whole are against inclusion, we would change as they propose. My understanding of the Code of Conduct is that it was intended to apply to the conduct of individuals, not policy decisions by OSGeo. Kind regards, -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] R: 2019 OSGeo UN Committee Educational Challenge
On 20/05/2019 07:28, Jonathan Moules wrote: > People with more than 40 years can apply. Yes but they suffer a 20% penalty, that's a very significant penalty and is explicitly discriminatory against what is commonly considered a "protected attribute" (age), hence my raising the issue. > Moeover the scores will be compensated by their experience, The problem with this is that you are assuming that people >=40 have experience with both writing proposals and giving training. Statistically they're more likely to have such experience but it's by no means guaranteed, it depends entirely on their career path. Discrimination against older people is a serious problem in the software industry, especially new entrants or returning participants in junior roles. I do not think that OSGeo should endorse this practice. We should be inclusive. The text also states that the gender of the proposer is a criterion. Why only gender and not sexuality, ability, or other diversity criteria? Will OSGeo accept self-reported gender identity? I prefer to avoid these identity-related criteria because they are not inclusive. The other criteria look good to me. Kind regards, -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Code of Conduct... followup to avoid lobbies
We may benefit from a few simple rules promoting transparency, altruism, and avoidance of conflicts of interest. However, rules are no substitute for culture, which we create with our behaviour. On 19/12/2018 23:43, Cameron Shorter wrote: Please keep our rules simple. Human interaction is complicated. And if we try to create a set of rules to cover every use case, we will just end up with a very complicated set of rules, which still won't cover all situations. -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Code of Conduct... followup to avoid lobbies
I support this idea. It would be analogous to academic journals that require authors to declare any conflicts of interest. We might also adopt a rule, if we do not already have one, that, when voting, members should act only to further the goals of OSGeo. While I do not expect that it would happen, I would not like to see an member vote for a client or employer in exchange for consideration. Adopting an explicit rule would, in my view, help members resist external pressure. We must also balance the risk of lobbies with the need to support members who are promoting OSGeo within their large organisations. Having several members in an organisation allows them to support each other in what can otherwise be a lonely position. Promotion of OSGeo through mentoring and development of new members is one of our most valuable forms of corporate outreach. In my view, any new rules should support and not discourage these outreach activities. Transparent disclosure may be sufficient and better than proscriptive rules. Kind regards, Ben. On 19/12/2018 00:45, Tom Chadwin wrote: Hello all Perhaps if we request a declaration of any relationship (commercial or personal) between nominator/seconder and nominee, that would make everything transparent, and allow members to judge for themselves whether such relationships cast doubt on the validity of the nominee? Thanks Tom -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Changes (and proposed changes) regarding the Code of Conduct
On 12/12/2018 23:08, Jonathan Moules wrote: Personally I'm not a fan of the Covenant; it has big subjective loopholes and components that be used to retroactively change the rules. My biggest problem with the Covenant is that it places responsibility for enforcement on project maintainers who did not realise that they might have to do this, may not have the skills, resources, or support required, and may be exposed to legal liability. If we adopt the Covenant, I think that enforcement should led by OSGeo officers who are trained, supported, and insured. The Covenant is not AFAIK a covenant in the legal sense. If we use it, we can withdraw if it is changed in a way we do not like. It is CC BY so we can use it as the basis for a customised CoC, which we would then have to maintain. Kind regards, -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Changes (and proposed changes) regarding the Code of Conduct
rased people is always covered by it. We can't rely anymore on just common sense and good faith. Once the new board is settled, I am going to propose to change the current CoC for another like the Contributor Covenant[2]. As it is a CoC shared by many communities, this has the advantage of receiving the upgrades and experience from other communities. As you can see, it fixes some of the bugs from our CoC, like the assuming good intent and good faith[3] part that made the current CoC useless on most cases. I will propose to add some foreword to adapt to specifities for our community, but in my opinion, the latest version of the Contributor Covenant is easy to read, simple, and cover most of what we need. My hope is that this new CoC can be adapted to all OSGeo Projects and Events that don't already have a CoC, so we have full OSGeo universe covered by default. I hope this actions will prove useful in the medium term and we don't have to see more members leaving the community. We should remember to be empathic and kind. We are all seeking the same goals and we should encourage cooperation, not hinder each other. I know that developer communities are very used to these bad behaviours, but I'm confident we can grow better. Have a nice day! María. [1] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2018-August/011640.html [2] https://www.contributor-covenant.org/ [3] https://thebias.com/2017/09/26/how-good-intent-undermines-diversity-and-inclusion/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Changes (and proposed changes) regarding the Code of Conduct
r OSGeo community, As you may already know, I have been working for the last months in improving our community procedures[1] to make it a safer space. Recent events in the community have shown that we have a lot of work ahead. We all, as OSGeo, must remove the recent bullying and campaigning mentality that is unfortunately gradually become a part of our culture. Disclosing private data or hinting threats is not helpful and can only make our community less comfortable for everyone. We will work on improving actions on harmful behavior. This has been a slow task, but there are some actions taking place: CoC committee members have become inactive. I volunteered to pick up the task and lead a new CoC committee. Right now I am the only CoC member, but I am looking for more volunteers. If only, to make sure that if I am involved in any CoC incident, someone else can take care of it properly as mediator. I want to change also the way incidents and violations of the CoC are reported. I noticed there are reports being done on person and on private email, but never through the official channels (which right now is a mailing list).To improve this, I will ask the SAC to replace the mailing list with an alias and a form on the website. Also, there will be a public list of who receives those emails so people reporting incidents will have a clear understanding of who is receiving the information and decide to contact privately only a subset of the team. Replacing the mailing list by an alias that sends the data directly to the inbox of the CoC team is important, as sometimes incidents are not reported just because the person reporting is scared to leave a trace of the report or is not sure who will be reading the report. Another action I am going to propose is a change on the CoC itself. Our community has grown a lot both in diversity and in numbers, and we need a strict code of conduct that makes sure marginalized or harrased people is always covered by it. We can't rely anymore on just common sense and good faith. Once the new board is settled, I am going to propose to change the current CoC for another like the Contributor Covenant[2]. As it is a CoC shared by many communities, this has the advantage of receiving the upgrades and experience from other communities. As you can see, it fixes some of the bugs from our CoC, like the assuming good intent and good faith[3] part that made the current CoC useless on most cases. I will propose to add some foreword to adapt to specifities for our community, but in my opinion, the latest version of the Contributor Covenant is easy to read, simple, and cover most of what we need. My hope is that this new CoC can be adapted to all OSGeo Projects and Events that don't already have a CoC, so we have full OSGeo universe covered by default. I hope this actions will prove useful in the medium term and we don't have to see more members leaving the community. We should remember to be empathic and kind. We are all seeking the same goals and we should encourage cooperation, not hinder each other. I know that developer communities are very used to these bad behaviours, but I'm confident we can grow better. Have a nice day! María. [1] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2018-August/011640.html [2] https://www.contributor-covenant.org/ [3] https://thebias.com/2017/09/26/how-good-intent-undermines-diversity-and-inclusion/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] FOSS for Application Schema development
My recollection is that FullMoon is a tool for converting XMI models into XSD schemas. If I recall correctly, the users I worked with all used Sparx Enterprise Architect to generate XMI models. The GeoSciML maintainers publish Enterprise Architect UML .eap files: http://www.geosciml.org/ I have dabbled with several open source UML editors with XMI support but do not like any of them enough to mention their names, let alone recommend them. Kind regards, Ben. On 18/08/18 11:52, Cameron Shorter wrote: A number of years back there was an Australian government sponsored development of developing application schemas and open source tools. At the time I was involved in it, the tools were functional and powerful, but still needed polish and were hard to get going. Here are some details to the project: https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/wiki/Siss/FullMoon Hopefully some of the people involved in the project can add more details. (Hello Rob Atkinson?) On 17/8/18 6:06 pm, Jorge S Mendes de Jesus wrote: Hi to all I am going to reply to this thread with a big disclaimer: Never tested or serious read the docs With this tool: https://shapechange.net/ If you have a UML model in XMI format you could probably use it to generate a Application Schema So far I havent found serious documentation***(for dummies**) *on how to do an application schema aside from some docs from OGC of already "standards" using application schema (https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=31065) Also, there is an ISO that could contain interesting information ISO 19109:2015 - Geographic information -- Rules for application schema But again pay wall to have access to information that IMHO should be open source Jorge On 17-08-18 09:55, 최규성 wrote: Dear All, I agree with Bart's understanding in the attached reply mail. While the original subject raised by Bart has been also of my great interest, this seems to get less attention from the Discussion List members. I myself have no good idea other than Enterprise Architect by Sparx Systems. Is there anybody who can answer more about Bart's questions; - Is there any FOSS alternative? - What would be in general the FOSS way of developing an application schema? Hoping to get feedbacks... Thanks in advance, Kyu-sung Choi EZMapping, Seoul, Korea (M. +82-10-5414-4374) ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G
Adam, I do not care for Stoet and Geary's attempt to explain the correlation they found, but their statistics are harder to dismiss. Anyone arguing for quantitative measures such as equality of gender outcome will need to address this quantitative evidence and explain how OSGeo might be able to overcome this wider cultural bias. While I admire the determination of those aiming for equal gender representation, I do not think this should be OSGeo policy. I continue to be disheartened by women not choosing or not remaining in STEM careers, despite improved gender equality. I believe (without evidence) that career choice is culturally determined, but then why do so many women leave STEM careers? When I was a union delegate, I supported through a personal grievance process a senior woman scientist from an ethnic minority who had been subjected to severe workplace bullying by a white male clique and their enablers, both male and female. I am more than willing to believe María's description of an "unfriendly environment". But is STEM worse than other disciplines? By comparison, in my country, the legal profession is currently under scrutiny for endemic workplace sexual harassment of both women and men. Despite the majority of law graduates being women, there is a high exit rate for women and low representation at the senior level, which is almost exclusively dominated by men. Is it the money? Do highly-paid disciplines attract the worst people, or make them? I do not know. I think that the best thing that OSGeo can do is to continue to support the "stubborn women" we have, especially those in leadership positions, because they are great role models for all. While women will likely continue to be underrepresented, at least we can ensure that we have enough diversity of role models that no one considering a career in open source GIS is discouraged. Keynotes are an important opportunity for role models to be visible. Kind regards, Ben. On 14/08/18 00:38, adam steer wrote: Hi all I appreciate this topic arising. I appreciate the efforts of the FOSS4G Dar committee; and the reasons for their decisions. I also appreciate that the FOSS4G Asia LOC have a different operating environment and look forward to hearing about their drivers. And I appreciate discussion about various factors affecting diversity and audiences. From FOSS4G Oceania experience it’s not an easy discussion to get right - I hope we all make the best effort we can. I also want to avoid papering over a substantially disheartening part of this particular e-mail conversation. Earlier in this discussion thread a research paper was rolled out as evidence that women choose to do STEM less; with the argument following that aiming for levels of attendance and speakership at FOSS4G conferences which represent the population is over-reach; and then a few people jumping on the sciencing wagon. So I read the paper. …and I'm puzzled that in 2018, such a work would be latched onto and held up as truth without question. I would certainly not try to use it as a platform to base a solid argument on. What was more disappointing is that this work was repeatedly held up as canon and defended, as a counter to Maria’s patient attempts to inject some living experience into discussion about a topic on which she has invested vast time and energy (and whose initial assessment of the work was actually completely correct)! A great first step to increase diversity and inclusion would be to avoid this type of top down lecturing and engage with experience - and then listen. To stories like Vicky’s. To the experience of Maria and Maria; to the committee from FOSS4G Asia who have made choices for reasons we don’t know; and from FOSS4G in Dar, who made choices for very clear reasons because they were able to; and aimed to have a specific impact (which I hope, has worked). Back to lurking now.. Adam ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G
Vicky, this recent article in The Economist discusses decreasing workforce participation of women in India, very much in-line with your experience: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/07/05/why-india-needs-women-to-work Kind regards, Ben. On 13/08/18 15:57, Vicky Vergara wrote: But I am glad that, this student's father is letting her study. And maybe, in the future, she will have daughters that will go to the University and they will be able to go out of the University premises to eat. And she will have grand-daughters that will can go out of the country (without a chaperon) and be speakers. -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G
On 12/08/18 21:14, María Arias de Reyna wrote: No, this is not a dismissal based on opinions. It is based on facts. This paper falls into the "correlation does not imply causation" fallacy:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation Yes, but lack of correlation refutes causation. That is their point: gender equality does *not* cause equality of STEM gender outcomes. Science requires humility. There is no greater experience in science than refuting your own hypothesis because it means that you might have discovered something non-obvious. The obvious hypothesis in this study was that equality of STEM gender outcomes would improve with gender equality. Their surprising discovery is the opposite. While there is much conjecture as to the cause, the core finding is remarkable, good science, and worthy of publication (in my uninformed opinion as a layman). Kind regards, -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Diversity in FOSS4G
On 13/08/18 07:31, Maria Antonia Brovelli wrote: in my opinion, we shall distinguish between equality and equity. Even supposing that there were countries where there is equality (but this is not true: think simply to the "gender gap", i.e. the difference in salary between men and women), the point is not of ensuring equality because there are great differences inherited by our history and by our culture. If we want to reach equality of outcomes, we have to consider equity, which is more than simply giving the same opportunities. Obviously, this is a choice. This is my choice, even if sometimes it is difficult and if sometimes I make mistakes. What we have collectively to decide is if, as OSGeo, we want to go in this direction. And, about that, I'm thinking of diversities that are wider than the gender (and, also about gender, better not to limit ourselves to the binary logic ;-) ). I'm absolutely positive about having a BOF on diversities at next FOSS4G. The more diversities, the better. I like diversity. I want equality of opportunity. While I believe that it is important to measure outcomes to identify and eliminate discrimination (including structural discrimination), outcomes are also affected by individual choice. While I would like equality of outcome to follow directly from equality of opportunity in all fields, large studies, including the STEM study discussed earlier, suggest that men and women have statistically significant differences in preference for fields of endeavour and balance between remuneration, conditions, and risk. The reasons for this are open for conjecture but the numbers are clear. For example, about half the 7% gender pay gap amongst Uber drivers is due to men driving 2.2% faster, and about 20% of the gap is due to men driving at more dangerous times and locations (I consider this economic impact of violence against women as structural discrimination): https://nz.finance.yahoo.com/news/researchers-detailed-male-uber-drivers-make-132101042.html Improvements in outcomes are a valuable measure of success, but I do not think that equality of outcome should be a goal in itself. Attempts to impose equality of outcome may be frustrated by gender differences in preference. Ill-considered measures such as quotas risk causing harm by discriminating against candidates with greater merit. I support equality of opportunity and the elimination of discrimination because these are beneficial and, as far as I can tell, without harmful side-effects. Kind regards, -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [OSGeoLive] Suggestions for a background image for next OSGeoLive - with an African theme
Tanzania's national animal is the giraffe. On 01/08/18 19:05, Astrid Emde (OSGeo) wrote: I also like the idea of the transparent image of an elephant with the map on it. -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [OSGeoLive] Suggestions for a background image for next OSGeoLive - with an African theme
Or an historical noncolonial or postcolonial map of Tanzania or Dar es Salaam? Or is this even a concern? I would like advice from the LOC. It would be great to give Dar es Salaam the same prominence (OSGeoLive background) as previous FOSS4G hosts. The Africa list rejects email from nonsubscribers such as myself. :-( Kind regards, Ben. On 29/07/18 04:15, Astrid Emde (OSGeo) wrote: Hello all, Ben you are with your comment. What do you think instead about an actual OSM Map from Dar Es Salaam - that shows how great the region is mapped https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/-6.8049/39.2472 or maybe a nice photo instead of a map. Astrid Am 28.07.2018 00:17 schrieb Ben Caradoc-Davies: I love historical maps. However, maps have been both the tool and emblem of colonisation, by which Africa has been particularly badly affected. The choice of an historical map of Africa for the OSGeoLive background must be informed by the actions of those who used it and their impact on the people of Africa, as well consider of the current-day appropriateness of the labels used on the map. I would follow the advice of the Africa Local Chapter and the Dar es Salaam LOC. Kind regards, Ben. On 28/07/18 09:23, Mark Iliffe wrote: I would vote for the map that you'd listed, but linking in the Africa Local Chapter :-) Cheers, Mark On 27 July 2018 at 08:32, Cameron Shorter wrote: The time has come to select a background image for our next OSGeoLive release, which is scheduled to be ready in time for FOSS4G Dar es Salaam, and we are looking for inspiration for a background image. Traditionally, we have drawn inspiration from the image from the conference location, and are hoping that someone with a mapping or artistic eye can suggest an interesting map, or image that we can use. The image needs to be available under an open license, and will likely need to be shaded so that icons will still stand out against it. I'm wondering whether a historic navigating chart of Africa would be good? Maybe something like this: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AMH-7121-KB_Map_of_Africa.jpg Or maybe a drawing of some of the big African animals. Are there any people in the mapping or African communities who would be willing to help us out here? Warm regards, -- Cameron Shorter Technology Demystifier Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant M +61 (0) 419 142 254Mark Iliffe ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ osgeolive mailing list osgeol...@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeolive -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Suggestions for a background image for next OSGeoLive - with an African theme
I love historical maps. However, maps have been both the tool and emblem of colonisation, by which Africa has been particularly badly affected. The choice of an historical map of Africa for the OSGeoLive background must be informed by the actions of those who used it and their impact on the people of Africa, as well consider of the current-day appropriateness of the labels used on the map. I would follow the advice of the Africa Local Chapter and the Dar es Salaam LOC. Kind regards, Ben. On 28/07/18 09:23, Mark Iliffe wrote: I would vote for the map that you'd listed, but linking in the Africa Local Chapter :-) Cheers, Mark On 27 July 2018 at 08:32, Cameron Shorter wrote: The time has come to select a background image for our next OSGeoLive release, which is scheduled to be ready in time for FOSS4G Dar es Salaam, and we are looking for inspiration for a background image. Traditionally, we have drawn inspiration from the image from the conference location, and are hoping that someone with a mapping or artistic eye can suggest an interesting map, or image that we can use. The image needs to be available under an open license, and will likely need to be shaded so that icons will still stand out against it. I'm wondering whether a historic navigating chart of Africa would be good? Maybe something like this: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AMH-7121-KB_Map_of_Africa.jpg Or maybe a drawing of some of the big African animals. Are there any people in the mapping or African communities who would be willing to help us out here? Warm regards, -- Cameron Shorter Technology Demystifier Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant M +61 (0) 419 142 254Mark Iliffe ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Ben Caradoc-Davies Director Transient Software Limited <https://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] twitting
On 04/11/17 09:06, Vicky Vergara wrote: I what to know: - The regularity of the election. (tweet says is irregular) Our CRO says that the elections were regular. On the basis of what I have seen, I support the findings of the CRO. Surprising or unusual behaviour by individuals does not negate the election. Members have exercised their votes. The results have been returned. The new board is in place. I accept the legitimacy of this democratic process, even though only two of the candidates I supported were successful. - if a suggestion makes a motion. Not according to Robert's Rules of Order, which require formal statement of a motion. - If a member of the board making a suggestion is stopping the board from working normally The reason why committee decisions can be made with a majority vote is to allow the committee to continue to function even in the presence of minority views or distractions. I trust the board to filter out the noise and make decisions that best further the goals of OSGeo. - If a suggestion that is not liked by a non board member can be used in twitter and not be dealt on a proper IRC channel or mailing list. and of course, if bringing a tweet like that to the discuss list for all members is ok or not. (I hope it is, because other wise I am trouble). I like public meetings and open discussion. Transparency is healthy. Let everyone have their say, in whatever forum, with calm and civility, and be accountable for their actions. Kind regards, -- Ben Caradoc-Davies <b...@transient.nz> Director Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] withdrawal from Board election
Vasile, +1. You have my full support for this course of action. I am not aware of any voting system that permits withdrawal of a candidate during the voting period. In my view, withdrawal during the voting period is out of order. Should the candidate be elected, the candidate may then formally resign. This will not be the CRO's problem. If a vacancy occurs immediately after a board election, I urge the board to use their authority to appoint as the replacement board member the unsuccessful candidate with the most votes. This would be in order, be in accord with the bylaws, and in keeping with the spirit of the election. Voters are no more disadvantaged than if they had voted for an unsuccessful candidate. Kind regards, Ben. On 23/10/17 02:19, Vasile Craciunescu wrote: Dear all, Please accept my apologies for the delayed reply. I was heavily involved in organizing the 20th edition of FOSS4G Romania [1]. I will try to express my opinion on what was said here and the board mailing list. 1. Neighter CRO or the Board cannot refuse Jeff's request to withdraw from the elections. In the absence of a specific rule, this is a unilateral act which does not require the CRO/Board acceptance in order to be valid. So, is up to Jeff to decide, based on people feedback, if he maintains his request or not. 2. We cannot remove Jeff's name from the voting ballot for at least two reasons. First one if of technical nature. LimeSurvey, the tool used for the electronic voting system, does not allow such changes in a running survey. Second, it is not correct/moral to change the list. Almost half of our charter members voted already based on that list and, actually, this is the main problem. Jeff's withdrawal has the potential to affect the result of this elections. We will never know where his votes could go and we have no clue how his decision will impact the votes that are still to come. Unfortunately, I see no good solution for the situation. My proposal to the Board and the OSGeo charter members is to leave the list as it is and make sure that the people that did not vote yet are aware of Jeff's request to withdraw from the Board elections. I can insert the information in the reminder mail that I'm planing to submit tonight/Monday morning. Best, Vasile CRO 2017 [1] http://www.geo-spatial.org/osgeo/bucuresti2017 On 10/21/17 3:34 PM, Jeff McKenna wrote: Dear CRO, Please accept my withdrawal from the Board election. I am sorry to cause all of the problems so clearly explained by so many here publicly this election. I wish to take the time now to thank all of the candidates for volunteering their time for the OSGeo community. Yours, -Jeff McKenna ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Ben Caradoc-Davies <b...@transient.nz> Director Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website
On 21/09/17 19:54, María Arias de Reyna wrote: In fact, publishing blog posts comparing closed and FLOSS is also very helpful. If you are doubting what kind of software to use, a good comparison with table feature comparisons is very handy But that should be outside the project page, because we are not begging for users. We are strong projects on our own, we don't need to keep continuously comparing to the closed alternatives for users to know what we do. Uplifting tweet of the week: "Jon Kuperman @jkup Stop treating open source like a product you purchased and start treating it like a team you belong to." https://twitter.com/jkup/status/909887066103676928 Referring to proprietary GIS on the OSGeo website risks misleading users that OSGeo projects are just competing products. We offer something that proprietary GIS never can: the opportunity to join a community of peers. Kind regards, -- Ben Caradoc-Davies <b...@transient.nz> Director Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] About the selected election periods
Good point. Perhaps a website account holder should be a "user"? If not, then "voting member" might be the least bad option. Kind regards, Ben. On 19/09/17 08:35, Jody Garnett wrote: But practice tried to lower the bar for being an osgeo member to ... signing up on the wiki. - http://www.osgeo.org/content/faq/getting_started.html -- Jody Garnett On 18 September 2017 at 13:06, Ben Caradoc-Davies <b...@transient.nz> wrote: The bylaws use the term "member". Less is more. Kind regards, Ben. On 19/09/17 02:39, Jody Garnett wrote: Of course we should still rename charter members (since that term means people who signed the original charter <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/charter%20member>). I know "voting member" does not sound quite as fun. -- Ben Caradoc-Davies <b...@transient.nz> Director Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/> New Zealand -- Ben Caradoc-Davies <b...@transient.nz> Director Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] About the selected election periods
The bylaws use the term "member". Less is more. Kind regards, Ben. On 19/09/17 02:39, Jody Garnett wrote: Of course we should still rename charter members (since that term means people who signed the original charter <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/charter%20member>). I know "voting member" does not sound quite as fun. -- Ben Caradoc-Davies <b...@transient.nz> Director Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] "Hostile Takeover" -- what do we mean by this?
Rather than stating what OSGeo is trying to avoid (a negative statement), it might be better to frame the responsibilities of charter members in terms of furthering the purpose of OSGeo (a positive statement): "The purpose of OSGeo is to establish and support a diverse open source community to foster the development, advancement and promotion of open geospatial software technology and data. To further this purpose, Charter Members have the following responsibilities: [...]" Kind regards, Ben. On 30/08/17 16:35, Sara Safavi wrote: Coming back to this discussion; thank you all who chimed in with more information. With the words of wisdom from Frank, Jody, and others -- is it fair to say that Charter Members have the responsibility of voting, as well as "preserving the integrity of the OSGeo Foundation"? That seems a less, well, hostile, way to express the main idea that seems to have come out of this discussion. On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Sara Safavi <s...@sarasafavi.com> wrote: Hi discuss, In the notification emails from CRO to new charter member nominees, the following is included (emphasis mine): *"(Charter Members) have the following responsibilities: (1) annually vote for OSGeo Board Members; (2) annually vote for new OSGeo Charter Members and (3) be aware of and protect against a hostile takeover of OSGeo."* I have had more than one nominee of mine contact me asking what exactly this means. I agree with their concerns: this is strange language to use, is not reflected in our bylaws, and frankly does not fit the image I presented when I first contacted them asking if they would accept a nomination. It may be a language barrier or simply a misunderstanding, but can we clarify what is meant by using this kind of verbiage, and consider a re-wording? Thanks, Sara ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Ben Caradoc-Davies <b...@transient.nz> Director Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/> New Zealand ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
