[Osmf-talk] 2021 Board election - Submission of self-nominations has closed

Mon Oct 25 07:36:48 UTC 2021

HI colleagues,

I agree with Allan. Election procedures provide legitimacy to a fair and
equitable election. This is an electoral norm, in organizations and in
politics.  It seems to me that procedures should not be shifted,
irrespective of the past behaviour. The OSMF board elections should
continue as is. There are examples of elections going awry in the open
space. This imbalances an organization and its credibility with the
membership. [1] We do need to make changes outside procedures.

The larger issues of engagement and equity, inclusion and diversity are
important. I agree and am glad you concur. What are the next steps to shift
this governance pattern? Let's really consider why people run/don't run,
how to obtain more diversity, equity and inclusion, what is the role/time
commitment for OSMF board and what needs to change.  There are no shortage
of programs (e.g. mentorship), terms of reference (e.g. role/time
commitments for board members), culture shifts, and, even, changes to AoAs.
The consultation process designed for the Etiquette guidelines might be a
good way to proceed. These are complex topics /systematic shifts that
should be done purposefully. Truly, it is time for OSMF to plan
accordingly.

For the current candidates, thank you for putting your name forward. I am
sure these topics will come up during your discussions.

With thanks,

Heather

Heather

[1] https://opensource.org/2021ElectionConcluded

Heather Leson
heatherleson at gmail.com
Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson
Blog: textontechs.com

On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 8:24 AM Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:

> While there are obviously a lot of similarities between a political
> process to elect positions in a parliament and the OSMF board election,
> equating them is taking this a bit too far in my opinion (there are a lot
> of differences but I'm not going to bore everybody with all of them).
>
> In particular the whole process timeline is at the discretion of the board
> to start with and it has changed multiple times in the history of the
> organisation, for example the nominations used to end two weeks before the
> election, now it seems to be four (extending the OSMFs silly season a lot
> :-)). The 10 day nomination period seems to be recent (as in the last
> couple of years) too in any case it is nothing sacred that is written in
> stone (is it documented in any medium?). Now you can argue that once the
> rules are announced they shouldn't be changed willy-nilly however arbitrary
> they were determined and I would agree, but on the other hand the whole
> purpose of the nomination process is to provide the membership with choice
> and it has miserably failed to do that, not for the 1st time I note.
>
> Simon
> Am 25.10.2021 um 04:19 schrieb Allan Mustard:
>
> Speaking only for myself, and not on behalf of the OSMF Board: I will not
> vote to change election procedures or the election schedule in the middle
> of an election process. My honors baccalaureate in political science
> informs me that tinkering with election procedures during an ongoing
> election is considered evidence of fraud and manipulation. I will not be a
> party to that. Others may hold different views. Potential candidates knew
> the deadlines and had opportunities to nominate themselves; if they did
> not, that was their choice.
>
> cheers,
> apm
> On 10/24/2021 2:43 PM, Heather Leson wrote:
>
> Well. Clear Election procedures are important. Changing a timeline could
> have an impact on the AGM timing.
>
> Heather
>
> On Sun., Oct. 24, 2021, 20:05 Simon Poole, <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Am 24. Oktober 2021 19:36:03 MESZ schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via osmf-talk
>> <osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>:
>> >Is it actually possible for board to extend nomination period in this
>> way?
>>
>> Why wouldn't it be? The nomination period is not something required or
>> defined in the AoA or elsewhere. Now there could be situations in which
>> changing the deadline could be problematic, for example shortening it, but
>> a simple extension would seem to not impact any members rights.
>>
>> Obviously the candidates need to be known to the board and membership
>> before the elections start, but everything else is likely just our
>> conventions.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> >
>> >If yes, then it would be quite nice as it stands it is less
>> >"select people fitting to lead OSMF" and more
>> >"which 2 of 6 people are the worst candidates".
>> >
>> >
>> >Oct 24, 2021, 12:31 by simon at poole.ch:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> I would suggest that the board extends the nomination period by a
>> week given the lack of diversity in the candidates.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Simon
>> >>
>> >> Am 24.10.2021 um 02:28 schrieb Dorothea      Kazazi:
>> >>
>> >>> Hello,
>> >>>
>> >>> Submission of self-nominations has closed.
>> >>> There are six candidates for four board seats:
>> >>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM21/Election_to_Board#List
>> >>>
>> >>> Members can continue adding their questions at:
>> >>>  >>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Foundation/AGM21/Election_to_Board#Community_questions_to_OSMF_board_candidates.2C_upon_which_the_official_set_will_be_based
>> >>>
>> >>> warm greetings,
>> >>> Dorothea
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________osmf-talk mailing
>> list>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>> >>>
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit Kaiten Mail
>> gesendet.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing listosmf-talk at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20211025/bac80e24/attachment.htm>