Hi Frank,
If anything, I see this survey already as a success: many charter
members who have not spoken in so long have awoken on this list and
voiced their passionate opinions about the OSGeo foundation. This to me
is very valuable (and why I have remained mostly quiet on this, since we
can't always have 1 or 2 voices for the entire organization). So I
still see this as a success, and am very appreciative for Vasile in
taking all this time to create the survey.
There will be lots of good information to process. (and most of it, as
you noted, won't be recorded in a spreadsheet)
-jeff
On 2015-08-03 1:39 PM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
Folks,
For what it's worth, I also do not feel comfortable with completing
the survey as it is currently structured as the structure forces me to
give answers that don't really represent my views.
For what it's worth I am in favor of:
- a modest number of charter members using something like the current process
- open membership
- no manditory membership fees
- make every effort to treat regular members the same as charter
members except for the minimum voting stuff required to be legally
distinct.
Best regards,
Frank
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Jim Klassen <klassen...@gmail.com> wrote:
I have been involved in the MapServer and GeoMoose projects since before
OSGeo existed. I remember the founding of OSGeo and the heated
discussions that took place to define the direction OSGeo would take.
The future of OSGeo and how it interacts with its members is very
important to me.
However, as a charter member, this current discussion and particularly
the survey has me confused as to how I should respond.
For starters: Should I be taking the survey now or waiting for it to be
improved? Where are the results of this survey going? Does this survey
count as an official vote(s)?
On 08/03/2015 05:16 AM, Vasile Craciunescu wrote:
Dear Bruce, Steve, Even, Peter, Dan and others,
Sorry for replying so late. I'm in vacation with limited Internet
access. Personally, I agree with many of your points. However, as
Steven already pointed out, we had a few days of open discussions on
the survey before sending to our Charter members. Somehow I expected
that our Charter members are subscribed on the discuss and board
mailing list and following the topics there. Perhaps we need a
dedicated mailing list for our Charter members or the invitation to
comment on the survey should be also sent individually to all our
Charter members. Not sure about the right approach. Anyway, please
keep in mind that this is the first time we are polling our members
and we still have to learn and adjust our communication skills.
Now, regarding the survey. The main point was to find the best method
to select our Charter members. This is an ongoing discussion for many
years. The survey included the previous voting options and some new
proposals. Then, some people suggested to use this opportunity to
include additionally questions regarding the future of OSGeo
membership. That's how the survey was created. The survey is really
flawed if is not connected with the discussions on the "board" and
"discuss" mailing lists. Different people, different angles, different
opinions... But only a fraction of our members expressed their
ideas/questions/opinions before assembling the survey. That's why the
survey looks heterogeneous. I did my best to merge similar topics and
not to include redundant questions. I also did not remove any question
based on my own judgement. Anyway, I find this exercise very useful
for our community. We should discuss further to keep our organization
on the right track.
Warm regards from the sunny Black Sea coast!
Vasile
PS I'm slowly catching up will all the emails on this thread (most of
them privately sent). I'll get back when I have the full picture.
On 7/31/15 3:07 AM, Bruce Bannerman wrote:
Hi Vassile,
This survey appears to be flawed.
I applaud your efforts to bring this issue to a head, but I'm not
convinced
that we'll get valid results from the survey.
In my case:
I believe that there should be open membership for any interested,
perhaps
with a membership fee.
I also see the value of recognising key contributors voted through some
meritocracy process as the current Charter Membership allows, with this
group having a voting responsibility. This is in essence not very
different
from the concept of a 'committers' group within an open source
project. I
don't really care if the name 'Charter Membership' is changed.
However the survey appears to lead people into a binary situation where
they believe in 'open' or 'closed' with 'closed' apparently assigned to
those favouring 'Charter Membership'.
For example:
I'd like to vote NO to 'Should OSGeo move from the actual elected
Charter
member model to an (open) regular membership?'
But, YES to 'If you agree with the OSGeo regular membership, do you also
agree with a low annual membership fee?'
However, I'm precluded from doing so, because I answered NO to Q1.
For Question 4, I would like to answer both:
- YES for Open, in the context that everyone interested should be
able to
participate in discussions and the OSGeo Community (perhaps having
paid a
membership fee); and
- YES for 'Closed', in the context of key votes being subject to the
equivalent of a 'Committers' list where people have been voted in
through
some meritocracy process.
- However, I can only choose one or the other!
I haven't read the remaining questions at this stage, given the flawed
questions at the beginning.
I apologise if you had sent this out for review earlier. I have not been
following this debate closely as this type of membership noise pops
up on a
regular basis.
However, when this proceeds to a vote of the OSGeo Charter membership, I
need to register a comment.
For consideration.
Bruce
From: Vasile Crăciunescu <c...@osgeo.org>
Reply-To: Vasile Crăciunescu <c...@osgeo.org>
Date: Thursday, 30 July 2015 23:52
To: Bruce Bannerman <>
Subject: Invitation to participate in the OSGeo membership
consultations
Dear Bruce,
As an existing OSGeo Charter Member, you have been invited to
participate
in the 2015 OSGeo membership consultations.
To participate, please click on the link below.
Sincerely,
Vasile ()
----------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
--
Jeff McKenna
MapServer Consulting and Training Services
http://www.gatewaygeomatics.com/
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
