Board of Directors candidacy question

[Britt Yazel]

Hello fellow foundation folks,

I have been somewhat out of the loop about this year's election cycle, and
I was just told today by Caroline and Kat that the nominations were due in
as of yesterday.

So clearly I missed the deadline, so one question is if it is too late for
me to consider throwing my name formally in the ring. Second, I'm not sure
if I would be a good choice given my Ph.D. schedule. Does anyone have an
idea of the weekly hourly commitment? I just don't want to do a poor job if
I we're to be appointed.

Cheers!

-Britt
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Re: Minutes of the board meeting of April 29, 2019

[Carlos Soriano via foundation-list]

Hi Tobi,

Just as small addition to what Rob said. As an example, I have been working
on some critical work for the foundation, for over a year now. This work
required extensive reading of legal, tax forms, research, etc. and is yet
to be finished. It's quite complex, and at the same time it cannot wait if
we want the foundation and project to keep growing and being healthy. It's
unlikely this work can continue without someone with the expertise gained
over the last year, and it's unlikely any effective hand off can be done
with a clean cut.

As Rob mentioned, over the last year the board of directors has changed to
a more strategic oversight, and the things we do are quite more complex
compared to what we were doing a year ago. While this is exciting and it's
good for the foundation, it adds the necessity to start doing long term
planning in a quite more complex environment.

While my duty if I want to continue this work is to apply again and
convince the membership to vote for me, this have a non-negligible
overhead. In my case, the uncertainty is making me focusing more on
preparing for a possible full hand off in less than a month than on keep
working on it. This is not healthy, and this doesn't work well. At the end
of the day is a matter of balance, and between the minimum term of 1 year
and the other extreme of no elections, we can find a middle ground that
works better with the new responsibilities and kind of work the board needs
to do nowadays.

It worth to mention that it's easier for any any person to commit to just
one year, so this is definitely not a selfish decision that we are
discussing (and I'm aware you didn't imply that), we are volunteers after
all. But this is not what we have found good for the foundation and the
directors going forward, so we believe a longer commitment will most
probably be what's needed.

Hope that helps clarify the situation, it's definitely different than what
we were one year ago, and it's normal that these questions arise. So don't
hesitate to let us know if you or anyone else has any more questions, just
keep in mind we are figuring things out as we move forward.

Cheers

On Wed, 22 May 2019 at 12:43, Robert McQueen  wrote:

> On Wed, 2019-05-22 at 11:35 +0200, Tobias Mueller wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> Hi Tobi,
>
> > I guess these plans are news to most members.
>
> They were mentioned previously in the blog posts we wrote after the
> hackfest last year - see http://ramcq.net/2018/10/19/gnome-foundation-h
> ackfest-2018/
>  - although
> not moved much further since then as you see
> from these minutes,
>
> > I think that the proposed change is a strict subset of what is
> > possible
> > today and that the cost associated with that change do not outweigh
> > the
> > benefits.
>
> We've received several large grants over the past year or so, and a
> spokesperson for the anonymous donor spent a while with the board
> talking about a number of factors, including the requirements around
> setting the compensation of the Executive Director (hence our new
> compensation committee) and more generally, how to attract and retain
> good staff, and be able to demonstrate impact for donors.
>
> They support a number of philanthropic initiatives and they impressed
> on us the importance of a growing Foundation that the strategy is
> maintained over longer periods of time, so that the resources that are
> given (ie donations, large or small) can be put to work on longer-term
> / more impactful projects, and that the staff are able to make plans to
> deliver such projects and impact.
>
> They said a normal time period for a directors term in most non-profits
> would be 3 years, but after discussion amongst the board it was felt
> that anything longer than a 2 year term might be a disincentive for
> people to stand for election. (Although as part of growing the
> Foundation budget and staff, we are aiming that the directors can
> reduce their time commitment to the usual oversight role of a board,
> allowing them to separately decide the extent to which they are able
> and willing to volunteer for other initiatives.) Most governments or
> other public bodies tend to have 3-4 year terms as well; for the same
> reasons. It's really hard to get *anything* non-trivial done in a year.
>
> A significant change of the board all at once, particularly if the
> incoming directors have less experience and might be less confident or
> decisive, is a significant fear of the staff of any non-profit. It
> threatens the ability of the (now 6-7) staff of the foundation being
> able to make effective plans, start longer-running programs and see
> them through, etc. If our decision making cadence, visibility and
> horizon is a year (or less) it's very hard to see past that for longer
> periods of time.
>
> In a business context the typical HR advice is that it takes 12-18
> months for a change in team structure, strategy, etc to really bear

GNOME Foundation Board of Directors Candidancy - Allan Day

[Allan Day]

Name: Allan Day
Email: a...@gnome.org
Affiliation: Red Hat


Dear Foundation Members,

I am announcing my intention to run for the GNOME Foundation Board of
Directors.

I have been contributing to GNOME for around 10 years, primarily in my
capacity as a designer, although I have previously contributed to
engagement and bug triage.

I am currently employed by Red Hat, where I work as a designer on the
Desktop Team.

I have been a member of the Board of Directors since 2015. During that
time, I've served as vice-president for a number of years, and have had a
short spell as secretary. I've had an impact in various areas, including
leading on trademarks, logistics for hiring Neil, leading on the events
code of conduct and most recently pushing forward with efforts to better
define our software.

I feel that I have the experience to help guide the foundation forward. The
foundation is going through a process of expansion, and we have been
working to become a more professional organisation, with clear roles and
responsibilities, and a more formal oversight role for the board. I am keen
for us to continue this process, and it is something that I would work to
support if I am re-elected. Another priority would be to complete the
software definition initiative that I've been working on for a while.

I don't have as much time for board work as in the past, but I can commit
to do what's required, and to pick up the odd task or initiative.

I look forward to any questions that you might have!

Yours,

Allan Day
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list