Hi all, On 17/10/2022 05:09, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
If there were good reason to have the meeting in private I would have expected to see supporting evidence shared with the board before the agenda was set. As of this morning nothing has been shared that would justify having even part of it in private.Hi all,Andreas Mantke wrote:if the person concerned (like in this case) has no issue to discuss the topic in public there shouldn't be any reason to handle this in private.There are good reasons to have a quick private discussion on the matter.
I'm also the one that asked for that item to be put in the agenda and in the public section to get Thorsten to provide an update on the case.
Of course, if the rest of the board agrees, we can move all, or part of that discussion to the public part.
Why should this excuse be used again for the same matter?I'm the one being accused of something so I believe it's my right to have that session in public.
Cheers, -- Thorsten
Ciao Paolo -- Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
