[Osmf-talk] Upcoming Special General Meeting Opinions?

Simon Poole simon at poole.ch
Sun Nov 30 14:27:33 UTC 2014



As the person who brought this to the point were the members can
actually have a say in the matter, I suppose I should say something on
the upcoming vote too.

First, term limits are a normal, widely used, safeguard against
incumbents overstaying. They do come at the expense of sometimes forcing
people to step down that you in principle would like to stay on, but
that is the nature of the beast: such a restriction has to apply evenly
to all. As Frederik and others have pointed out, there is essentially
nothing in OSM that requires a board position for you to help with the
project and there are more than enough things former board members can
help with if they are so inclined. Matter of fact making a board
position a prerequisite for helping with OSM is IMHO a reason for
immediate disqualification, as any notion of entitlement to such a seat.

As Randy Meech has pointed out many times, you currently only need a
small number of votes to get a seat. Any board member worth her/his salt
will easily have a power base large enough that will guarantee constant
re-election for as long as they please. Maybe some day in the future the
OSMF membership will be so numerous that the danger no longer exists,
however that is a long way away.

Some concerns have been raised that the OSMF might run out of potential
board members with such limits. As we saw at the last elections, there
is no shortage of capable candidates, and if you are really concerned,
please accept the 2nd special resolution, which in practical terms
completely removes any such issue.

Nobody is claiming that term limits will solve all problems with the
OSMF board on the structural side. A number of other items that have
been touched on that need addressing too, for example actually defining
terms for board members. Please do not let yourself be confused, these
topics, while important, have nothing to do with issues that the
proposed changes are designed to address and are no replacement for them.

Kate has claimed that the just past election has provided "enough
changeover" that the board should simply be allowed to carry on as is.
To believe that needs a gigantic leap of faith, two relatively short
serving reformers have simply been replaced by two even fresher reformers.

The balance of power in the board has not changed at all.

In the interest of the OSM project and the OSMF, please vote yes on all
three resolutions.

Thank you

Simon




-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20141130/ee2791cf/attachment.sig>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list