[Osmf-talk] Possible AoA Amendment #2: Your boss can't force you to vote a certain way

[Rory McCann]

The Linux Foundation is intentionally structured in completely the opposite way, such that the highest tier of corporate members/sponsors always control the majority of their Board of Directors. To them "corporate control of the board" is the goal, and they have deliberately chosen not to do "one person one vote".

AFAIK Wikimedia Foundation is not very democratic, with 4 of 10 being appointed by the rest of the board and 1 seat permanently reserved for Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales. 3 of the 10 seats are elected.

Alas, despite their stated ideals, and the goals of their projects, we should look to them as things we should not do.

On Mon, 26 Oct 2020, at 10:06 AM, Sander Deryckere wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> As an outsider with little legal knowledge, I also wonder how similar 
> foundations handle this. Could you get in touch with entities like the 
> Wikimedia Foundation, or the Linux Foundation? Both manage 
> community-created, open-licensed, intellectual property? Do they have 
> measures in place to avoid hostile takeovers?
> 
> Kind regards,
> Sander
> 
> Op ma 26 okt. 2020 om 05:07 schreef Heather Leson <heatherleson at gmail.com>:
> > Morning all and thanks for this conversation.
> > 
> > Let's pause and take the time to do the consulation and writing with legal advice. Mikel (on list) and Rob (on diary) both asked for this. Yes, there needs to be adjustments, but let's make this a top priority with the board for the next round.
> > 
> > 
> > Heather
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>