Hi Klaus-Jürgen, all,

Am 29.10.2017 um 13:02 schrieb K-J LibreOffice:
> Hi Andreas, all,
> Am 29.10.2017 um 10:29 schrieb Andreas Mantke:
>> the elections for the next TDF Board of Directors has been started one
>> and a half week ago. The decision on the list of members that have a
>> vote in this election has been done by the membership committee in its
>> current composition. The announcement of the elections was done by the
>> current chair of the membership committee.
> That was his job to do until now.
seemed we share not the same view here. I think everyone who consider to
candidate should step down before she/he was involved in any procedure
(also preparing procedure) of the election.

> I asked Cor to make his candidacy as early as possible so that the MC
> has the ability to react. Cor makes this in a fine way (for me) as he
> didn't wait too long.

See above. We didn't share the same view on the best process here.

>> I took not that he nominates himself for the upcoming elections yet,
>> that he and the MC has to run and oversee.
> As he steps down from chair now he won't run or oversee the election.
> We have an exeptional MC-meeting about BoD-election tommorow.
> And the MC has to vote for a new chair.

I didn't share that only the step down from the chair is enough. I
explained that already two years ago in another case.

>> Second: I'm not used to a procedure in elections where a candidate is
>> also the one or part of the group that run and/or oversee the elections
>> (and/or the entitlement to vote) and I've taken part in elections of
>> different organizations in the past (smaller and bigger organizations).
> It is the same as if the BoD has to vote about some tenders for one
> affiliated companies. The part is out of voting, overseeing it or
> something like that.

I wouldn't go to further here. This are two different things, but to add
there is always the risk to get no vote because of too much connected
members of the body.

>> And in my opinion a process with a clear separation between 'election
>> committee' and candidates would be in the best interest of TDF and was
>> also the perception of the TDF founder (Freies Office Deutschland e.V.).
>> If the founder would have had another perception, the current regulation
>> with the MC running the elections for the board and the board running
>> the elections for the MC wouldn't make that much sense.
> See the statutes.

Didn't get your message here.

>> Third: I already shared this view with all involved people internal
>> during the last weeks. My take on this didn't change during the last two
>> years.
>> Fourth: I'm also no fan of stepping down during the period of duty to
>> get the position inside another body.
> That is until now the only way to demonstrate to be not involved in
> election.

I think we talk about different things here. I tried to explain that in
my opinion someone who was elected for two years and didn't explain his
electors in front of his election that he wouldn't serve for two years,
but only for one or a bit more years, creates an issue with his former
electors. He needs to explain, why he'll not serve the whole period and
/or if there is an emergency to apply for another body.

Kind regards,

## Infrastructure Developer LibreOffice
## Freie Office-Suite für Windows, Linux, Mac
## http://LibreOffice.org
## Support the Document Foundation (http://documentfoundation.org)
## Mein Blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog

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/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Reply via email to