[Osmf-talk] Remarks and question regarding board meeting minutes and circulars

Christoph Hormann chris_hormann at gmx.de
Wed Dec 19 10:51:46 UTC 2018

On Wednesday 19 December 2018, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > My question here is if the board is going to change that in a way
> > that ensures timely transparency of the advisory board input before
> > it goes into decisions of the board.
> Can you suggest a practical way of doing that? I'm sure the board
> would be open to suggestions.

If you like i can start with what i indicated, i.e. writing a subjective 
log of AB input from my perspective and if you then say:  This we can 
do as well and probably in a more neutral fashion you can just take 

> This is just to put things into perspective. *You* know that yourself
> since you are on the advisory board, but someone who is not on the
> advisory board might get the idea that dozens of emails were
> exchanged monthly and the advisory board was actively working on
> things. In reality, the advisory board is a mailing list that makes
> it easier to run an idea by corporate members and local chapters for
> feedback, and it happens... what would you say, maybe three or four
> times a year on average?

Yes, the volume of communication is very low and a significant part of 
it is just housekeeping (announcing and welcoming new members etc.).

But also keep in mind that not everything that happens in the context of 
AB activity happens on the AB mailing list - there have on multiple 
occasions been indications that work was performed as part of or in 
connection with AB activity but outside the realm of the AB mailing 

Personally i think it might be a good idea (in other words: it might 
yield more valuable advise) to adopt a somewhat more clearly defined 
process for the AB in the way that topics brought to the AB for input 
(either from inside the AB, from the board or from the WGs) are then 
discussed by the AB in a certain timeframe and the results of this 
discussion are then sent to the board as input.

Having a clearer separation between discussion and the advise provided 
as a result of this discussion could both have a positive effect on the 
depth and thoroughness of the discussion and the quality and 
signal-to-noise ratio of the input received by the board.

Christoph Hormann

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list