Hi Andreas, all,
Andreas Mantke wrote on 30/03/2023 14:28:
Am 29.03.23 um 15:58 schrieb Cor Nouws:
A personal interest is not a conflict of interest which in general is
not a reason to abstain from discussing topics.
sorry to be very clear here: I've never read or heard such nonsense
inside other communities, I'm active in.
Apart from the validity of your statement: as we all know, TDF is not
the average organization.
I think the documents, linked by Paolo in his email on this list, should
show, that all members with a personal interest had to keep out of any
discussion (and decision) of the corresponding topics.
So you and Paolo forget TDF rules? Let's take a detailed look then.
= TDF Statues =
= = = = = = = =
== § 8 Duties of the Board of directors ==
(3) The board of directors is obliged, via explicit publication in a
generally used communication medium, to notify the public about:
a.) (about statues, rules etc)
b.) (about composition of the bodies)
c.) (about procedings, discussions, decisions)
d.) conflict of interest lasting longer than a month;
e.) (decision on a complaint)
- - - -
Note: How to read the 'conflict of interest'? What more do the
statues tell about 'conflicts of interest'. The only, _only_, mention
is to be found in 8.4:
- - - -
(4) The board of directors prevents conflicts of interest within the
Foundation. The board of directors is therefore obliged to ensure, that
the board of directors itself, the membership committee, and the
advisory board, at maximum have one third of their members being
employed by a single company, organisation, entity or their respective
affiliates of the aforementioned. The board of directors can expel one
member per month from each of the foundations bodies, until the conflict
of interest situation is either settled, or a re-election of the entity
has been initiated. The board of directors can to resolve the conflict
of interest by expelling the necessary number of members from other
committee at once, and/or replace member by other members of such committee.
- - - -
Conclusion: § 8.3. deals with § 8.4, i.e. the composition of the
foundations bodies.
- - - -
Do the statues provide more support for this reading? Let us look at § 9.6:
== § 9 Resolutions of the Board of directors ==
(6) A board of directors member is barred from voting, if the vote
contains any of the following subject matters:
* self-dealing with the member,
* the initiation or cessation of a lawsuit between the Foundation and
the member, or
* grants from Foundation means towards the member, or an entity the
member is a board member or a member of the executive body of another
entity.
- - - -
So this § 9.6 mentions the topics where directors may not vote. That
are all typical conflict of interest situations, and all linked to
voting/resolutions; situations limited in time per definition and not
'permanent'. So 'conflict of interest lasting longer that a month',
is also in § 9.6 not related to specific topics/proposals.
- - - -
Source https://www.documentfoundation.org/statutes/
= From the older Community Bylaws =
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
It is interesting to look at the older Community Bylaws, that were the
base for the current statues.
These mention three rules to prevent the most-obvious potential cases of
such conflicts in our Community: max 3 BoD members of one entity; max
30% of members in MC; and max 30% of members of the ESC from one entity.
Source
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/CommunityBylaws#Provisions_Concerning_Possible_Conflicts_of_Interest
= CoI policy =
= = = = = = = =
What does the CoI policy learn?
From 4.1 and 4.2 it is clear that a person with a CoI may not vote on
topics/items causing or bordering with the conflict.. but may
participate in discussions:
" … a conflicted person
4\.1 .... shall at a minimum always be excluded from any vote and any
activity regarding any topics or items causing or bordering with the
conflict for as long as the conflict is not certain to have vanished.
The person *may participate in discussions, unless it suspended its
disclosure duties (see 4.2*). ...
4\.2 .... according to below rules has a duty to disclose. As an
exceptional procedure an obliged person may *suspend their disclosure
duties* only if they* fully and completely refrain from influencing a
discussion,* thread, topic or topical area in all direct or indirect
means, directly or via third parties. This requires complete and full
abstention e.g. from any proposal, vote, decision, contract or
transaction, until the topic is fully settled.
Source
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/6/6e/BoD_Conflict_of_Interest_Policy_ver1_3_2.pdf
= Conclusion =
= = = = = = = =
- - - -
* The statutes do not say that persons in a (potential) CoI situation
should abstain from discussions around the topics; and the statutes
dó -implicitly- expect that Directors may be involved with
discussions over transactions with 'themselves';
* The CoI policy explicitly says conflicted directors may
participate in discussions.
- - - -
Further question: why didn't declare Cor also a personal interest about
this three topics?
Sorry if it is not there. IIRC I said the same applied for me - as is
usually the case - so my name should be there in the minutes too.
I ask you and also Thorsten and Gabor to not participate in any
discussion (and decision) of the corresponding topics. This is important
because otherwise you violate obligations as board member and create
liabilities.
Nope - the only logic reading from the statues is that it is allowed for
board members to also participate in discussions where there is a CoI in
the decision. You should also be able to find out that there is no legal
ground either, to exclude people with a CoI from discussions.
Finally the archives of discussions at the start, around the first
bylaws and from there to the statues are clear on the intention and reading.
Concluding: to me the push from you, some members of the board and
people around the board to not follow TDF's statues/rules, looks as a
attempt to exclude members affiliated with ecosystem companies at
various places in TDF. And that would be a clear breach with the
principles that helped to ground the foundation.
If you and others are of the opinion that that should happen, please be
clear and work on a sensible discussion around the topic. But please do
stop behaving as something that one would associate with a troll rather
then a member contributing our work.
Thanks,
Cor
--
Cor Nouws, member Board of Directors
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28 A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6
mobile : +31 (0)6 25 20 7001
skype : cornouws
blog : cor4office-nl.blogspot.com
jabber : cor4off...@jabber.org
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
