Thanks all for the input for this issues. I think the gender issue is realy serious but I agree also with Franklin that there are additional issues of diversity we face. That was my intention with my mail three days ahead of the end of nomination.
Having said that it is my strong believe that now - as the set of candidates is fix - it is not so much an issue of theoretical discussion but more an issue of practical doing and initiatives of the then elected members of the upcoming board. We all then should reach out, hearing and understanding these parts of the community (or the missing/rare ones e.g. members from a missing continent like Africa) and then acting in their benefit. If it then turns out that we need a special role in sense of gender spokesperson in which seat so ever, then thats it, or if we should reach open source events in Africa to meet and encourage them, or have an international scholarship programm for getting young contributers, we could decide even with this new board. This is our responsibility then, if elected. To stopp the process of election here I think that is a very complicated idea. To hear and discuss a new way of nomination and seats with the community for the next one In 2 years to avoid this current situation, hearing and discussing these in the sense of having more transparency between the bodies board, mb and members, I think this is a realy crucial task for the new board, which I hope to help with. All the best Lothar Von meinem iPhone gesendet > Am 02.12.2019 um 23:48 schrieb Franklin Weng > <frank...@documentfoundation.org>: > > > > 2019年12月3日 06:21:43 Sam Tuke : > > > Thanks Thorsten; that's very helpful context. The 48% chance you referenced > > does indicate that the issue is still larger than this particular election. > > It's also worth noting that Gabriele, Italo, and others did a great job of > > reminding us of the opportunity to stand, and the deadlines. > > As the election has a strict timetable, it seems that a procedural change > > would now be necessary in order to avoid a board devoid of women. > > Were procedural changes possible, they could include extending the > > nomination phase, or keeping one or more seats open explicitly for a female > > board member in future. If such changes are impossible, then those ideas > > could be explored by the next board. > > Thoughts from other Board members or Trustees? This might be the most > > direct stimulus to this subject for another two years. > > Thanks, > > Sam. > > IIRC in the current term the board has only few decisions regarding genders. > Currently I care more about the diversity of the community itself, i.e. to > motivate communities in different countries, to include different fields of > people like designing, marketing, politics, …etc. We may need more spaces to > make these people shining in the FOSS world. > > Also, ages may be a more serious problem than genders especially in some > local communities. That's why I proposed the students program, to try > attracting more young people into the community. > > As for the board, I'm sure that it will eventually be diverse enough as long > as 1) the composition of our community members are broad enough, and 2) we > don't block the interactions between the board of trustees and the BoD and > the MC. > > -- > Franklin Weng, Member, Board of Director & Certification Committee > The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE > Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts > Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
