[OSM-talk] wiki - OSM Foundation

Etienne 80n80n at gmail.com
Mon May 22 01:25:26 BST 2006


David
Those are my words, based on my recollections of the meetings and
discussions and Steve's recent announcement.

I've tried to express my understanding of what was agreed in an
explicit and unambiguous form - hence spelling out the rights and
obligations of preliminary members.  It's possible (likely)  that
other people have different interpretations of the meetings and it
would be good to elicit these now rather than later.

As I currently understand it the elected officers *will* have carte
blanche to do whatever they want.  I'd hope that those standing will
put forward some kind of manifesto that at least suggests what they
intend to do membershipwise and how they believe the project should
move forward.  Otherwise we have nothing to vote about.

It occurs to me, though, that there ought to be some kind of quorum
for this initial vote..

Etienne


On 5/22/06, David Groom <reviews at pacific-rim.net> wrote:
>
>
> Just looking at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Foundation
>
> on that page it states "Preliminary Members of the OpenStreetMap Foundation
> will have the right to vote for the three principal officers of the
> foundation in the first vote. This vote will be open from June 11, 2006 for
> a period of x days. Preliminary members will not have any other rights or
> obligations."
>
> My understanding of a strict interpretation of the above, is that once the
> three principal officers have been elected they can do what ever they like,
> as the preliminary members have no further rights.  Whilst in practice I am
> sure it is likely that the three principal officers will have the best
> interests of the OSM project at heart, I do not like the theory of blindly
> handing everything over to the control of three people with absolutely no
> checks or controls.
>
> The problem seems to stem from the fact that the idea is to elect three
> people, but not to give them any specific responsibilities of what they are
> to do next.
>
> I think that allied to the fact that we are to vote for the three specified
> positions that it should be made clear that it is the responsibility of
> those three to come up with a constitution / way forward etc, that the
> preliminary members will be able to vote upon.  If in such a vote the a
> majority of the preliminary members do not agree with the constitution then
> either the three elected persons should redraft the constitution, or should
> subject themselves to re-election.
>
>
> David
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
>




More information about the talk mailing list