Hello Rod, Thanks for your question. In fact I do not have a lot to add to what Martin said. Some things are indeed just not suitable for wider distribution. Martin gives already the example of disputes among community members, but I also think about sensitive staffing issues. E.g. should everybody (even the membership) really know that a staff member wants a few days off because of health issues or a family crises?
In what I do agree with you Rod, is that we probably better could state what kind of issues are not for public release. Let’s see if I can work something out to make this clearer. Best greetings, Jorieke On 1/26/16, Martin Dittus <[email protected]> wrote: > As someone who has sat on the board of a large community organisation > (>1,000 members) I accept that some concerns are not suitable for wide > distribution. For example, if the board is asked to deal with a dispute > among community members, then the matter should be discussed in confidence > unless explicitly requested by all parties. (I have no idea what this > section in the minutes was actually referring to.) > > m. > > > > >> On 26 Jan 2016, at 20:06, Rod Bera <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Jorieke, >> >> this is not personal, as this practice dates back from days you weren't >> in office yet, not even a member. >> >> But I have to say once again I have a serious problem with this kind of >> item: >> >> " >> >> 3. [Not for Public Release] >> >> PRESENTING: Dale >> >> ACTION: Vote >> >> NOTES: >> >> We discussed and voted on the matter. The item was approved.This item >> was to be shared with the Membership Chair. >> >> " >> >> An example of the secrecy I believe is detrimental to HOT in terms of >> trust, transparency, accountability, democracy. This isn't new in HOT >> matters but is to new members. >> >> Note: I agree there could be some stuff not for public release, but this >> should not hold for members. If this was subsequently brought to >> members' knowledge could we add a reference to the actual documents (and >> access this document)? Or are the members denied information on this >> "item 3"? >> >> Regards, >> >> Rod >> >> On 22/01/16 20:29, Jorieke Vyncke wrote: >>> Hello hotties, >>> >>> Sharing the board minutes of our December 2015 and January 2016 >>> meetings with you. >>> >>> Informal discussion December 9: >>> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B65TOMtm9My4bnB6bk15dzdqN0U >>> >>> Board meeting December 23: >>> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B65TOMtm9My4NWZ2R1Y2WHRGRlE >>> >>> Board meeting January 6: >>> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B65TOMtm9My4azV1VUE3b01QOUU >>> >>> Board meeting January 20: >>> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B65TOMtm9My4Sk9lRGMweFJFX1k >>> >>> Questions are like always welcome! >>> >>> Best greetings, >>> >>> Jorieke >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> HOT mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >>> >> >> >> -- >> Rod Béra, MCF Géomatique / Lecturer, Geomatics >> et SIG pour l'Environnement / and Environmental GIS >> Agrocampus-Ouest|65 r.Saint-Brieuc|CS84215|35042 Rennes cedex|France >> +33 (0) 223 48 5553 - [email protected] >> >> _______________________________________________ >> HOT mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > _______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
