[Osmf-talk] Next OSMF board meeting this Thursday, 17th of January, at 21:00 London time

Mikel Maron mikel.maron at gmail.com
Thu Jan 17 16:48:39 UTC 2019

> The board was not elected "to be a board" but to fulfill a function  within the OSMF - as per the AoA and the "Scope of the OSMF board" in the Mission statement.

The OSMF Board of Directors has a legal obligation to the Foundation under the Companies Act, the Articles of Association, the process of election and accountability by members, and our own internal guidance. There's lots of interesting discussion and scope within that governance structure that plays out every day. 
Some members might have ideas about what it means to be a "Board" of Directors. Nevertheless, we certainly were elected to be Board Members, and saying that we were not is confusing to those who are not as steeped in our governance. Let's not worry too much about labels, but focus on how things operate. We are a board.
The OSMF Board has every right to conduct business privately when necessary. How else are we going to secretly engineer the take over of OSM? ;) But seriously, the default for Board meetings is open, and we have good reasons when they are not. I do agree, we should as a matter of course explain in the agenda why something is placed in the closed portion -- this is something to improve in our process. I think Frederik explained well enough for the item in today's agenda, and while members are free to disagree, ultimately there will be a limit to any explanation as to why we are not discussing something in the open at a particular moment in time. 
Note there's another agenda item in the closed portion, which hasn't been raised as an issue. That might be because there's general awareness that something of personnel matter can't be discussed publicly.
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

    On Thursday, January 17, 2019, 9:43:54 AM EST, Christoph Hormann <chris_hormann at gmx.de> wrote:  
 On Thursday 17 January 2019, Heather Leson wrote:
> Hello, I appreciate your call for full transparency. The board was
> elected to be a board. As Frederick stated that we need time to
> verbally deliberate with each other. Then build a plan. Then we will
> share. First, we need to consider the details and next steps.
> As it is about some members, we owe them the respect to consider all
> items before publicly stating items.

You are free to deliberate in whatever form you want but i need to 
correct one thing here:

The board was not elected "to be a board" but to fulfill a function 
within the OSMF - as per the AoA and the "Scope of the OSMF board" in 
the Mission statement.

And the OSMF members also have functions in this framework, in 
particular that of oversight over the board.  Allowing the members to 
fulfill this function is also a matter of respect.

Hint:  If you provide a reason for closing parts of a meeting in the 
agenda i don't need to bother everyone by asking for it on osmf-talk...

Christoph Hormann

osmf-talk mailing list
osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20190117/59427281/attachment.html>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list