[Osmf-talk] clarification of the AoA amendment on board committees

[Simon Poole]

Am 06.12.2020 um 19:52 schrieb Rory McCann:
> I'm a little surprised this has caused controversy, since I thought this was just a paperwork type amendment. But huh.
>
> I don't want the board to try to take over working groups, and I don't believe this amendment would do that. Perhaps I'm more concerned with how people act than what's written down. I can see how an evil board could surplant more and more of volunteer OSMing, without setting up formal committees, and a good board could have committees and not do anything evil.

Again I didn't remotely claim that what the board was suggesting was 
evil, just the way it was framed ran contrary to what had been the 
practice of the OSMF over the past 12 years. Further while I am against 
the change in its current form, I pointed out that I would support a 
modified version that was a bit more generic, in particular if the 
requirement for a board member to chair a committee was dropped.

Interesting enough while this point seems to have caused a lot of 
uproar, my 2nd point that the board needs to reframe the OSMF mission 
statement if it wants to restrict membership as proposed, essentially 
nobody has commented on that, more important point, leading me to 
believe that essentially nobody actually read the diary entry and the 
comments are just based on hearsay.

Simon

>
> On Thu, 3 Dec 2020, at 02:03, Allan Mustard wrote:
>> Please read my diary post clarifying what the proposed  Articles of
>> Association amendment is about.  There has been confusion about it and
>> I apologize for not being utterly, totally clear.  The diary post is
>> here:  https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/apm-wa/diary/394981.  Please
>> feel free to leave comments there or to reply to this talk message.
>>
>> The text of the diary post is as follows:
>>
>>
>>> The OSMF Board is asking the membership to approve an amendment to the Articles of Association that will allow Board committees (specified in the AoA as only consisting of Board members) to include any Foundation member, associate or full, to serve on a Board committee. The reason for this is that some of the Board’s administrative work, such as handling our finances, has proven very time consuming, more than one person can handle. Another sphere is the budget preparation, and yet another is fundraising. Since the Board is also hiring fulltime staff and engaging contractors, it needs help with oversight.
>>> Some board members have been asked if this is intended to supplant the Working Groups. At least one diary entry has been posted by a community member asserting that this is the case, and urging Foundation members to vote against the amendment.
>>> The proposed AoA amendment is NOT intended to supplant Working Groups. The Working Groups handle the substantive and administrative issues of the community, which is separate from the Foundation and the Board. The Working Groups would therefore not be affected. As I envision it, the Board committees would deal with personnel, budget, and fundraising, none of which fall in the remit of any Working Group.
>>> I urge Foundation members to vote in favor of the AoA amendment, and then to volunteer to serve on one of the Board committees (and on Working Groups, too, but separately!)
>> Thank you and happy mapping!
>>
>> -------
>> *Allan Mustard, Chairperson*
>> *Board of Directors*
>> *OpenStreetMap Foundation*
>> _______________________________________________
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20201206/7e9ac16b/attachment.sig>