[Osmf-talk] Conflicts of interest (was Re: [2022 board election] Candidates' answers and manifestos published)

[Minh Nguyen]

Vào lúc 14:52 2022-11-18, Dorothea Kazazi đã viết:
> The official questions by Michael Collinson were based on questions by
> the community and from previous years. The community questions are here:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Foundation/AGM2022/Election_to_Board#Community_questions_to_OSMF_board_candidates,_upon_which_the_official_set_will_be_based

Thanks to all the candidates for taking the time to respond to this 
extensive questionnaire. As a voting member, I appreciate this effort 
because it allows candidates to present a broader picture of their 
involvement and thinking around OSM, not just the parts we tend to talk 
about day to day.

The responses to question 5, about transparency and conflicts of 
interest 
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM2022/Election_to_Board/Answers_and_manifestos/Q05_Transparency_-_Conflicts_of_interest>, 
raised some questions in my mind. After chatting briefly with Mateusz in 
OSMUS Slack, I’d like to give him an opportunity to clarify his response 
to this question before the membership here.

Mateusz Konieczny writes:

> This is probably not relevant in OSM, at least for now, but I want to 
> mention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gag_order 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gag_order> which were issued for 
> example in UK or USA, including bans on ever saying anything about 
> being served with one.
>
I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make by mentioning gag 
orders, which can only be issued by courts of law, in the context of a 
question about conflicts of interest. If you’re insinuating that the UK 
judiciary could be covering up a conflict of interest against the OSMF, 
then the Foundation has far more serious problems than I imagined. 
Perhaps there was a confusion with a non-disclosure agreement (NDA), 
which in some cases could prevent its subject from speaking out about 
its existence.

I would like to know the scenario by which you theorize that a candidate 
might be compromised by a gag order or secret NDA to unduly influence 
the decisions made by the board, and whether you believe there’s a 
substantially higher risk of this scenario involving candidates from the 
United Kingdom or United States versus other countries. If this is not 
so relevant to the election, then I hope my fellow voters don’t read too 
much into this suggestive statement. More broadly, I hope that whoever 
ends up on the board takes due care when floating legal theories, which 
coming from a board member could unnecessarily result in a 
misunderstanding or overreaction.

(For full disclosure: Arun and I work on different teams at Mapbox. 
However, I’m starting this discussion out of an earnest desire to set 
the record straight regarding the kinds of legal obligations that a 
candidate may or may not be subject to, not to campaign in his favor.)

-- 
Minh Nguyen<mxn at 1ec5.org>
Jabber:mxn at 1ec5.org; Blog:http://notes.1ec5.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20221119/d74c67d4/attachment.htm>