Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] board f2f planning / prep

2015-12-16 Thread Massimiliano Cannata 
Dear cameron
I'm very supportive of your suggestions.

Empowering the community is also one of my personal priority.

Maxi
Il 16/Dic/2015 21:07, "Cameron Shorter"  ha
scritto:

> OSGeo Board,
> For the Board Face to Face meeting, I suggest asking the OSGeo community
> for ideas to put on the OSGeo board agenda.
>
> One topic I think worth adding to [1] is:
>
> "Re-engaging with the OSGeo Community"
>
> My gut feeling is that over the years email activity and new ideas has
> gradually reduced on OSGeo-Discuss email list, and gradually increased on
> the OSGeo-Board email list. (I'd love to find some evidenced based research
> to confirm or deny this).
>
> If this is true, it would imply that OSGeo is moving from a grass roots,
> community empowered organisation, where the board's main role is validating
> community ideas, toward a hierachical organisation where the board is
> driving the OSGeo agenda.
>
> Personally, I think a grass roots organisation structure is more
> effective, and more in line with OSGeo's founding principles.
>
> I suggest a starting point could be to discuss ideas on OSGeo-Discuss by
> default, then move to the board list to vote.
> Another idea worth building upon is inviting the OSGeo Charter members to
> vote on key topics occasionally in order to help the board gauge community
> sentiment.
>
> Warm regards, Cameron Shorter
>
> On 16/12/2015 9:48 pm, Vasile Craciunescu wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Like Maxi, I don't see the need for an external facilitator. Anyway, the
>> meeting agenda is extremely important. Let's start working on that. The
>> wiki page for the meeting [1] already include the general topics. Please
>> add your specific topics and let's try to allocate a time frame for each
>> topic.
>>
>> Best,
>> Vasile
>>
>> [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Face_to_Face_Meeting_2016
>>
>> On 12/16/15 9:42 AM, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>> personally i don't think we need any facilitator to have a F2F meeting
>>> between few people.
>>>
>>> Before taking any action in this direction I request to be discussed and
>>> eventually voted.
>>>
>>> best
>>> Maxi
>>>
>>> 2015-12-16 8:05 GMT+01:00 Jody Garnett >> >:
>>>
>>> I have not seen the agenda for f2f meeting yet.
>>>
>>> Personally I would prefer it focus on longer term strategy then our
>>> usual month to month IRC meetings.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>> On 15 December 2015 at 22:51, Gert-Jan van der Weijden - Stichting
>>> OSGeo.nl > wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jody and others, 
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> Actually I have had (informal) contact with 2 process
>>> facilitators, who might be willing to take this (paid) role.
>>>
>>> Some instant remarks on this:
>>>
>>> - do you need a facilitator just for the weekend or also for the
>>> preparations (to be honest, the f2f agenda so far seems to focus
>>> on practical issues, not on the agenda itself)
>>>
>>> - is the goal of the f2f to define a OSGeo strategy for the next
>>> few years, or about "how to run an not-for-profit organisation".
>>> 
>>>
>>> - or is it even -given Jeff's resigning- more about how to run a
>>> Board with different persons, cultures, ideas (which might
>>> require a more mediator-like facilitator)
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> Or just someone who takes the notes, makes sure the coffee is at
>>> the right temperature etc.
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> Kind regards, 
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> Gert-Jan
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> *Van:*Board [mailto:board-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
>>> ] *Namens *Jody Garnett
>>> *Verzonden:* woensdag 16 december 2015 02:13
>>> *Aan:* bo...@lists.osgeo.org 
>>> *Onderwerp:* [Board] board f2f planning / prep
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> One interesting idea on the discuss list (from Gert-Jan) was
>>> inviting an external party to act as an "independant process
>>> facilitator". Given we have very few days and a lot to cover I
>>> would like to pursue this idea.
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> This is one of those things that is difficult to arrange from
>>> afar - do we have any contacts (say with the local OSGeo
>>> community) who would be in position to offer a recomendation?
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Board mailing list
>>> bo...@lists.osgeo.org 
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] board f2f planning / prep

2015-12-16 Thread Jody Garnett 
Cameron:

I like the approach with email lists from a social dynamic point of view.

As a community member / project lead I moved to the board list several
years ago to cut down on the noise. It was important to safe
guard my time and board offered a higher signal to noise ratio.

Still steering discussion to discuss and voting to the board lists is a
solid idea :)

--
Jody Garnett

On 16 December 2015 at 12:07, Cameron Shorter 
wrote:

> OSGeo Board,
> For the Board Face to Face meeting, I suggest asking the OSGeo community
> for ideas to put on the OSGeo board agenda.
>
> One topic I think worth adding to [1] is:
>
> "Re-engaging with the OSGeo Community"
>
> My gut feeling is that over the years email activity and new ideas has
> gradually reduced on OSGeo-Discuss email list, and gradually increased on
> the OSGeo-Board email list. (I'd love to find some evidenced based research
> to confirm or deny this).
>
> If this is true, it would imply that OSGeo is moving from a grass roots,
> community empowered organisation, where the board's main role is validating
> community ideas, toward a hierachical organisation where the board is
> driving the OSGeo agenda.
>
> Personally, I think a grass roots organisation structure is more
> effective, and more in line with OSGeo's founding principles.
>
> I suggest a starting point could be to discuss ideas on OSGeo-Discuss by
> default, then move to the board list to vote.
> Another idea worth building upon is inviting the OSGeo Charter members to
> vote on key topics occasionally in order to help the board gauge community
> sentiment.
>
> Warm regards, Cameron Shorter
>
>
> On 16/12/2015 9:48 pm, Vasile Craciunescu wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Like Maxi, I don't see the need for an external facilitator. Anyway, the
>> meeting agenda is extremely important. Let's start working on that. The
>> wiki page for the meeting [1] already include the general topics. Please
>> add your specific topics and let's try to allocate a time frame for each
>> topic.
>>
>> Best,
>> Vasile
>>
>> [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Face_to_Face_Meeting_2016
>>
>> On 12/16/15 9:42 AM, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>> personally i don't think we need any facilitator to have a F2F meeting
>>> between few people.
>>>
>>> Before taking any action in this direction I request to be discussed and
>>> eventually voted.
>>>
>>> best
>>> Maxi
>>>
>>> 2015-12-16 8:05 GMT+01:00 Jody Garnett >> >:
>>>
>>> I have not seen the agenda for f2f meeting yet.
>>>
>>> Personally I would prefer it focus on longer term strategy then our
>>> usual month to month IRC meetings.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>> On 15 December 2015 at 22:51, Gert-Jan van der Weijden - Stichting
>>> OSGeo.nl > wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jody and others, 
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> Actually I have had (informal) contact with 2 process
>>> facilitators, who might be willing to take this (paid) role.
>>>
>>> Some instant remarks on this:
>>>
>>> - do you need a facilitator just for the weekend or also for the
>>> preparations (to be honest, the f2f agenda so far seems to focus
>>> on practical issues, not on the agenda itself)
>>>
>>> - is the goal of the f2f to define a OSGeo strategy for the next
>>> few years, or about "how to run an not-for-profit organisation".
>>> 
>>>
>>> - or is it even -given Jeff's resigning- more about how to run a
>>> Board with different persons, cultures, ideas (which might
>>> require a more mediator-like facilitator)
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> Or just someone who takes the notes, makes sure the coffee is at
>>> the right temperature etc.
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> Kind regards, 
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> Gert-Jan
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> *Van:*Board [mailto:board-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
>>> ] *Namens *Jody Garnett
>>> *Verzonden:* woensdag 16 december 2015 02:13
>>> *Aan:* bo...@lists.osgeo.org 
>>> *Onderwerp:* [Board] board f2f planning / prep
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> One interesting idea on the discuss list (from Gert-Jan) was
>>> inviting an external party to act as an "independant process
>>> facilitator". Given we have very few days and a lot to cover I
>>> would like to pursue this idea.
>>>
>>> __ __
>>>
>>> This is one of those things that is difficult to arrange from
>>> afar - do we have any contacts (say with the local OSGeo
>>> community) who would be in position to offer a recomendation?