[OSM-talk] For the foundation AGM

[Andy Robinson]

Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
>Sent: 19 July 2007 2:34 PM
>To: Talk Openstreetmap
>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] For the foundation AGM
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>80n wrote:
>> Robert
>> Thanks for starting this.  I have to get the formal announcement out
>> today since we have to give 21 days notice of an AGM.
>>
>> My intention is to keep the agenda of the AGM restricted to only those
>> things that really have to be done at the AGM.  I don't want it to turn
>> into a 4 hour marathon.
>>
>> Several of the points that you have added can be, and are being,
>> discussed through the normal channels - I don't think we need to
>> overload the AGM with these topics.  If an impass is reached on some
>> point then it can always be raised under AOB at the meeting.
>
>My thought was that all things should be discussed here, then set to a
>vote at the AGM without much (or even any) further debate because the
>debate would have already happened, and most of the votes would have
>been decided in advance and be done by proxy.
>
>That's why I want to get the debates started ASAP, so that they can
>finish in time to pass them at the AGM. :-)
>
>IMHO the most important thing that must be decided and passed at AGM
>level is the rules under which the foundation will deal in the rights to
>data that is assigned to it. Without good rules, either some people will
>consider withdrawing their data (as a few people have threatened), or we
>won't solve anything - the foundation's hands will be too tied.
>i.e. it won't be able to allow things to be done with the data that are
>unclear or not allowed under the license, but agreed with by the
>majority of the community (like allow the maps to be used for deriving
>public domain postcode data - i.e. freethepostcode / npemaps).
>
>It needs to be decided at AGM level because it needs to be deep enough
>in the constitution of the foundation so that "evil SteveC" can't
>subvert the foundation and steal the data. :-)
>
>This means we need to decide what the rules will mean in practise, and
>ask a lawyer to write them in legally valid language in time for the AGM
>in only 21 days so that we can pass the resolution then.
>
>I think I'll start another thread for the discussion.
>

Yes, these discussions should be on another thread. AGM's are normally very
short affairs dealing with the specific business of the Foundation (ie how
it is running, its accounts etc etc). The sorts of points you are raising
are "management" business and would not be part of an AGM except if they are
raised as points in AOB (in which case they normally get incorporated in the
Agenda for the following year or are dealt with by EGM if required).

Cheers

Andy

Andy Robinson
Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk 



>Robert (Jamie) Munro
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin)
>Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>iD8DBQFGn2g5z+aYVHdncI0RAllwAKCAxxYgGMUYblaRCEq1wQkvM0laBgCgo1Gl
>kjvATlQp8ra8xpLQmQiaJyQ=
>=0364
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk