[Osmf-talk] Upcoming Special General Meeting Opinions?

Kate Chapman kate at maploser.com
Sun Nov 30 13:33:36 UTC 2014


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

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Tim Waters <chippy2005 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello folks,
>
> Several days have passed since the announcement of the Special General
> Meeting (SGM) and we have just over a week until the vote occurs.
>
> I note a pattern in OSM related elections where the (sometimes
> impassioned) discussion seems to occur at the very last minute, often after
> proxy votes have started. Could we perhaps seek to start the discussion
> about this meeting before the last minute, and at least before proxy voting
> starts?
>
> I understand that "The board has decided not to take a position on the
> resolutions" ... and that...  "Board members with opinions are asked to
> speak their mind".
>
> May I ask that those Board members please feel encouraged to explain a
> little bit more about the meeting at this stage?
>
> We, members, do know know who proposed the SGM, or why and may not know
> what the changes really mean, and so I think that we may want to know such
> things before voting upon them at the end of next week.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Tim
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20141130/dfa3b763/attachment.html>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list