[Osmf-talk] Board Cohesion/Confidentiality

Emilie Laffray emilie.laffray at gmail.com
Mon Oct 8 13:02:36 UTC 2012

+1 to what Sam said.
While it is clear that some information should remain confidential for many
potential reason and that disagreements should be minuted, I don't see the
point in having a smooth front if there is much infighting behind the scene.
Having been there, I can see the need to show that we are moving as one but
I can see also the point of vocal, polite disagreement as a way to
encourage internal democracy within the foundation. I don't think it is
normal that we have to wait to be out from the board to show and express
disagreements with the direction the board is taking in general.
I think there is much to gain by having more public debate on some things.
However, the board is clearly the body that got elected to take those
decisions ultimately.

Emilie Laffray

On 8 October 2012 10:00, Sam Larsen <samlarsen1 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> > I do think the idea of Collective Responsibility is good one.
> -1
> Please don't impose this crazy Westminster convention on the board.  I
> support the board being responsible for the decisions they make.  At the
> same time i emphatically support the right of Frederik or anyone to voice
> their objections to what the Board is deciding by consensus.  As noted in
> the cited Wikipedia article, Claire Short's opposition to the invasion of
> Iraq was a notable exception to this cabinet rule.  I don't want to have a
> system where board members are pressured to publicly lie about their
> support for particular decisions like many politicians were when the US &
> UK invaded Iraq.  I want the board members that i voted for to tell me the
> truth about what is happening and how they feel about it.
> I am happy Frederik has voiced his opinions, i just think it might have
> been a little less controversial if he had voiced them on this mailing list
> instead of on his blog.  This is a democratic forum, anyone with a keen
> interest in OSM can join this list and be included in important discussions
> about OSM.  It's not the end of the world, we are having some problems that
> people are trying to work through, but let's get a little perspective - at
> least we don't have a swarm of a million BIG_GUY bots destroying all our
> hard work.
> Sam
> >
> >> Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2012 01:27:58 +0200
> >> From: MichaelK_OSM at gmx.de
> >> To: osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Osmf-talk] Board Cohesion/Confidentiality
> >>
> >> On 05.10.2012 15:55, Steve Coast wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >> -1 !
> >> :-(
> >>
> >> As there are only two new board members and the quoted email only refers
> >> to one of this persons I would infer that you address Frederik by that
> >> comment. Please correct if this is a wrong understanding.
> >>
> >> Maybe there is a language barrier between Frederik and yourself. But (I
> >> think) I very much understand what he writes in the blog that is linked.
> >> And he does not at all want to publish all that's discussed while board
> >> meeting. He just requests to "be as open as possible". And he request
> >> clear rules for the work of the board which I as a comunity and OSMF
> >> member would consider to be normal and already in place! If not in place
> >> that's a bad thing. He also takes the example of Wikimedia which has a
> >> "board with clear rules" which is very much linked to open content: open
> >> content and open communication does not object to secret discussions.
> >> But maybe I understand Frederik easier as I have the same German
> >> thinking as Frederik and the British/American thinking/understanding is
> >> different. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
> >>
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Michael.
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> osmf-talk mailing list
> >> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >osmf-talk mailing list
> >osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20121008/cbe4a6e4/attachment.html>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list