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
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 p.baum...@jacobs-university.de wrote:
Cameron all,
a lot of serious, involved work is going on on this thread; however,
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
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 general this sounds workable for this year. Nominations will no
longer compete against each other but only against the benchmark of what
makes a good member.
The only reservation I have is on the 50% Yes/No, but maybe I just need
a clarification.
I see plenty of people potentially voting
Shorter cameron.shor...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter
members
Date: 25 June 2014 12:31:03 BST
To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org
Following the community discussion, I further researched OSGeo's foundation
documents, (in retrospect I should have
Correct: “membership”, by design at the original founding meeting, was designed
not to confer ANY rights or distinguishing properties except for the ability to
vote for board members.
While the election process is pretty messy right now, I view that as a solvable
problem: I’m still at a loss
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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/23/2014 09:33 PM, b.j.kob...@utwente.nl wrote:
I am very dissapointed in this whole membership/fees discussion.
In reading the emails one does not see the international volunteer
community I would like to think OSGEO is (should be), but it
-
De: Mr. Puneet Kishor [mailto:punk.k...@gmail.com]
Enviada: segunda-feira, 23 de Junho de 2014 17:41
Para: Howard Butler
Cc: ML osgeo discuss
Assunto: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposed process for selecting OSGeo charter
members
On Jun 23, 2014, at 6:08 PM, Howard Butler how...@hobu.co wrote
Hi,
I was following this thread with disbelief how most of the participants
don't understand which is the situation of open idea, open source
applications and open data in most countries round the world. And what
kind of support those people get when trying to bring message to
disbelievers.
Hi Kari,
some replies inline.
Best regards,
Bart
On 24 Jun 2014, at 11:47, Kari Salovaara kari.salova...@pp1.inet.fi wrote:
Hi,
I was following this thread with disbelief how most of the participants don't
understand which is the situation of open idea, open source applications and
El 24/06/14 10:58, Duarte Carreira escribió:
Well I just have to chime in...
I do promote osgeo projects all the time. I don't get paid. I am a Charter
Member. This sometimes is useful for people to understand the sense of
community that exists in Open Source projects, as opposed to other
Good food for thought Howard, can’t say I disagree with anything you say here.
The only thing we need to consider is that for some countries 50 or 70 USD can
still be a lot of money.
Best regards,
Bart
On 23 Jun 2014, at 16:12, Howard Butler how...@hobu.co wrote:
On Jun 20, 2014, at 7:38
On Jun 23, 2014, at 9:25 AM, Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl wrote:
Good food for thought Howard, can’t say I disagree with anything you say here.
The only thing we need to consider is that for some countries 50 or 70 USD
can still be a lot of money
Yes. Something equitable could be
+1 for dues. I would sign up.
On Jun 23, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Howard Butler how...@hobu.co wrote:
On Jun 23, 2014, at 9:25 AM, Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl wrote:
Good food for thought Howard, can’t say I disagree with anything you say
here.
The only thing we need to consider
On 6/23/14 9:25 AM, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
Good food for thought Howard, can’t say I disagree with anything you say here.
The only thing we need to consider is that for some countries 50 or 70 USD can
still be a lot of money.
All,
I also agree whole heartily with Howard.
Regarding the
Membership dues for OSGeo could very well work, but they would change the
nature of the organization. While it makes sense for those who are
professionals and thus want to belong to professional organizations, many
OSGeo members are not professionals in the sense of depending upon
OSGeo's projects
AAG has a sliding income scale, no reason something like that, or a
hamburger index multiplier, can't be used to fix that up.
http://www.economist.com/content/big-mac-index
P.
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl wrote:
Good food for thought Howard, can’t say
On Jun 23, 2014, at 10:13 AM, P Kishor punk.k...@gmail.com wrote:
Membership dues for OSGeo could very well work, but they would change the
nature of the organization.
Yes, that may be true, however it is also true that OSGeo as an organization
has significantly evolved significantly two or
Howard,
I’ve wanted membership dues to happen for a long time, but haven’t been able to
express it as eloquently or as persuasively as you just did.
Mark
On Jun 23, 2014, at 10:12 AM, Howard Butler how...@hobu.co wrote:
On Jun 20, 2014, at 7:38 AM, Cameron Shorter
All,
nice to have this discussion brought on table, finally.
Some local chapters already collect fees for their membership.
So OSGeo may collect a percentage of perceived fees.
Obviously, this should be discussed and defined by local chapters.
It may lead to increasing the current membership
On Jun 23, 2014, at 6:08 PM, Howard Butler how...@hobu.co wrote:
Do you lose a significant benefit by not being a Charter Member? Just the
ability to vote for the board and the ability to tout your exclusivity on a
vita/resume. Anything else? Lack of membership does not prevent anyone
On Jun 23, 2014, at 12:40 PM, Mr. Puneet Kishor punk.k...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 23, 2014, at 6:08 PM, Howard Butler how...@hobu.co wrote:
Do you lose a significant benefit by not being a Charter Member? Just the
ability to vote for the board and the ability to tout your exclusivity
On 06/23/2014 11:01 AM, Dimitris Kotzinos wrote:
Dear Cameron,
thanks for the reply and the comments to my previous e-mail. It also
gave me a chance to revisit the rules around the charter members.
I was expecting this issue to be further discussed within the community
and i am a bit
On 06/19/2014 11:58 AM, Peter Baumann wrote:
Hi all,
good - and important! - discussion!
Being Charter Member I am somewhat concerned:
- I am surprised that the common democratic procedure of election is
perceived as creating dissent.
Well it's somewhat conjecture without public
I am very dissapointed in this whole membership/fees discussion. In
reading the emails one does not see the international volunteer community
I would like to think OSGEO is (should be), but it rather seems we are
dealing with a US-based professional organisation, mostly keen on not
paying US
I think that might be a slight misunderstanding. We are an international
organization, our main funding accounts happen to be subject to US law
currently.
The main funds used to seed FOSS4g each year come from this, which 2/3+
of the time is outside the US. Exhibition packs to local chapters
Thanks for your feedback Dimitris,
You have made some valuable comments.
I'm also surprised that there has only been a few comments on this
thread, although I'm hopeful that this equates to a general feeling that
the proposal as crafted is reasonably close to group opinion.
The proposal as it
Ah, I replied to this email (from my osgeo-board inbox) before reading
the rest of my emails from my osgeo-discuss inbox. I see there has been
a lot of discussion about this proposal in the last 12 hrs.
I'm still of the opinion that charter membership is most valuable when
provided to
Thanks Paul, Dimitris and Peter for your thoughts.
Comments inline.
On 20/06/2014 4:31 am, Paul Ramsey wrote:
http://www.aag.org/cs/membership/individual_membership
http://www.aag.org/cs/membership/individual_membership/dues
Both simpler, and better for the bottom line of OSGeo, if you want
Dear all,
some thoughts on the proposed changes on the Charter Member election
process.
I will divide my comments into two parts, first some issues about the
process itself and then some comments on the proposed changes.
(A) the process per se:
1/ I think that whatever change in the election
http://www.aag.org/cs/membership/individual_membership
http://www.aag.org/cs/membership/individual_membership/dues
Both simpler, and better for the bottom line of OSGeo, if you want to
be a member, sign up as a member, collect your t-shirt, see you @
foss4g.
P.
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:28 AM,
Hi all,
good - and important! - discussion!
Being Charter Member I am somewhat concerned:
- I am surprised that the common democratic procedure of election is perceived
as creating dissent.
- yes, democracy is expensive, but generally it is considered worth the effort.
- is lifelong
+1
D.
On 18-06-14 04:15, Arnulf Christl wrote:
[...]
Is the board going to vote on this proposal or all charter
members?
Thanks, Alex
This is actually a good question and maybe points towards a new way of
leveraging our Charter Membership. I would think that it would be
worthwhile to
2014-06-15 1:52 GMT+02:00 Cameron Shorter cameron.shor...@gmail.com:
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
Hi List,
Regarding the new proposal for voting in charter members- it's slightly off
topic, but I doubt all existing Local Chapter representatives have been
voted in by at least 3 charter members. That sets the bar quite high for
new chapters as well- under the new regime if they have no existing
I like the idea of the new Charter Membership rules.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Jo Cook joc...@astuntechnology.com wrote:
Hi List,
Regarding the new proposal for voting in charter members- it's slightly
off topic, but I doubt all existing Local Chapter representatives have been
voted
On 06/17/2014 12:22 PM, Eli Adam wrote:
I like the idea of the new Charter Membership rules.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Jo Cook joc...@astuntechnology.com wrote:
Hi List,
Regarding the new proposal for voting in charter members- it's slightly
off topic, but I doubt all existing
Thanks all for the feedback.
One thing that you have made me realise is that the text was potentially
unclear as to whether a person is eligible as a recognised community
leader if they previously, but not currently hold a role as a PSC member
(or similar). The intent is they should be
On 18/06/2014 5:48 am, Alex Mandel wrote:
Is the board going to vote on this proposal or all charter members?
Alex,
Vote on the changed process will be put to the board. It is currently
significantly easier to manage a board process than a charter member
voting process.
--
Cameron Shorter,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[...]
Is the board going to vote on this proposal or all charter
members?
Thanks, Alex
This is actually a good question and maybe points towards a new way of
leveraging our Charter Membership. I would think that it would be
worthwhile to pass
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
43 matches
Mail list logo
