[Osmf-talk] Upcoming Special General Meeting Opinions?

Kate Chapman kate at maploser.com
Mon Dec 1 18:19:09 UTC 2014


Hi Johan,

On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Johan & Marguerite <textline at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> Kate, could you clarify what you mean by
> 1. the root of the problem
>

I think there are a couple root problems. The first is joining the OSMF
board seems like to some a chore someone has to do. Sometimes this means we
don't necessarily have the right people on the board. I think part of this
is because there seems to be two differing views within what the OSMF
should be. Either it should do as little as possible OR we become like the
Wikimedia Foundation (WMF). I think most of us really want something in the
middle, but often when for example the idea of raising money for staff
comes up the response becomes "OMG you are going to make us like the WMF".
Though I don't think anyone or at least most people are suggesting more
than there are some tasks that would potentially be assisted by having some
paid support. General administrative support is one part that I think could
be helpful.

These differing views then spill out into the board which has been
deadlocked due to what seem to be personality and belief differences, this
has existed since prior to the start of my term on the board. I do think
that things seem to be a bit better with the most recent election, though
we haven't had time to accomplish really anything yet.

2. governance issues
>

The very core of the governance issues to me is what don't have a vision or
strategy. We don't really have a way to get to a point where we have a
vision or strategy. I do feel like we are being reactionary right now.
There are other ways to approach things. Though key to that is getting
ourselves out of the board conflict. I think an in person board meeting and
a chance to act as a new board is a good step forward for this.

Best,

-Kate


>
> Cheers, Johan
>
> 2014-11-30 14:33 GMT+01:00 Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com>:
>
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> Personally I do not believe in the proposed resolutions. I feel like we
>> are trying to propose a solution without getting to the root of the
>> problem. I think other than term limits there are other ways to solve the
>> perceived issue of people being too long on the board. Simply making the
>> terms clear, in my opinion two years would work well would help. At the
>> moment when 1/3 of the board needs to step down every year it is never
>> quite clear who needs to run, this is especially true when people resign.
>> Clear terms I think would do a lot to help with these items.
>>
>> I also feel with 3 of the 7 board members being recently elected there
>> has been enough changeover that the new board should be given a chance.
>> Having an in person meeting with facilitation will be an important
>> component to that. Though at the moment we don't have enough time for this
>> to possibly happen before the meeting. We are aiming for early in the new
>> year though.
>>
>> As a member I'll be voting no on all three resolutions. I do think at the
>> next election at the latest we should vote on changing the terms to be a
>> specific number. OSMF certainly has governance issues but I don't think
>> approaching those issues in a reactionary way is the best way forward.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Kate
>>
>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20141201/cf209006/attachment.html>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list