[Osmf-talk] OSMF board elections - slight repost
richard at systemeD.net
Wed Aug 31 15:01:07 UTC 2011
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> The way I see it, it is the OSMF members who run the shop, and they
> elect a board to do the running on their behalf in between AGMs.
Indeed. So if the new board members feel they have a mandate from members
to stage daily board meetings by standing on top of their respective
houses and shouting very loudly at each other, that can in theory happen.
Might be fun!
In practice, however, the way in which meetings are staged isn't likely to
be a campaigning issue for board candidates, let alone an AGM/EGM issue.
It's one of the minutiae that you elect a board to "just get on with".
(Plus, in most years, only a minority of seats will be up for election,
which will militate in favour of the status quo.)
At the very least, there is a reasonable expectation that the current
arrangement will continue, and a prospective candidate would be
ill-advised to stand without being sure they could commit themselves to
it. But that requires knowing what it is.
In trying to find out the current position, I've had four conflicting
- meetings are weekly (last official OSMF statement, from
- meetings are fortnightly (asking someone who knows)
- meetings are now quarterly (asking someone else who knows, reputedly
decided at a face-to-face meeting whose minutes have not been released
- meetings are sporadic at best (OSMF website lists 1st June, 22nd July -
presumably an error for 22nd June - 11th/12th July, and 17th August)
(My experience on the Strategic Working Group suggests it's often a
lottery as to whether any Board member turns up - without which the
meeting is invalid - which lends credence to the latter. :) )
For the avoidance of doubt, I haven't and am not asking for a handbook,
though I think one would be a good idea in due course; just public answers
to a few very simple questions about what the workload of an OSMF board
member might be.
More information about the osmf-talk