Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Wed Jul 29 14:46:25 UTC 2009


Richard Weait wrote:
> Perhaps the board will not implement these changes in the articles of
> association before the election, but the board can certainly issue a
> statement supporting the goal of reduced risk and increased diversity
> in the board.
> The board members involved can also agree to support the goals of
> reduced risk and increased diversity by voluntarily withdrawing their
> nominations that exceed one candidate per company.


I'd rather view this as a moral thing than a legal issue. Obviously the 
idea behind "one person per company" means persons whose personal wealth 
or life situation is interweaved with the company's fortunes, so it 
might be an employee, owner, major stakeholder, contractor drawing a 
significant portion of their income from the company, investor or whatever.

And I wouldn't even start to try to set up hard guidelines ("how much is 
significant?" etc.). I would expect that people, when asking for our 
vote, either explain that they're not involved with the same company as 
other people also asking for our vote, or otherwise explain why they 
think it would be good for OSMF to have more than one person involved 
with the same company on the board.

I also wish to point out that this is totally independent of any past 
performance (if applicable at all). The idea behind "one person per 
company" is to increase diversity and to make sure that OSMF does get 
too involved with any one company's fortunes, and this has absolutely 
nothing to do with how good or trustworthy the people in question are 
and whether or not any irregularities have occurred in the past.


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list