I've split this into a new thread and removed the original private email, which was posted by mistake.
I'm very sorry to see Bruce choosing to step away, I have great respect for his inputs over the last few years. I think it raises an important issue for OSGeo Oceania and this community. I agree with Edoardo and Bruce that communications must be open, for reasons both principled and pragmatic; this is what open source communities are all about. OSGeo Oceania was created on a promise of transparency [1], and should live up to that promise. The board in particular has the opportunity to lead by example, and set the tone for this open community. I believe most of the current board agrees with this, and the 2021 board got off to a great start, returning discussion to public lists, using a public Loomio for voting on motions, and voting in favour of opening board meetings [2]. Kudos to Edoardo for his huge efforts in leading this push. Part way through the year the board's public discussion seemed to drop off considerably, immediately following a discussion about transparency (ironically). As an outsider, I don't know what the board discusses in private. But if I may speculate: there may be a small minority who prefer the board to operate in private, and the force of their opposition to measures intended to improve transparency could have a chilling effect on the rest of the board's commitment to operate in public. I believe this dynamic, if it exists, is a severe detriment to the functioning of the organisation, and I hope it comes to an end as soon as possible. John [1] OSGeo Oceania Terms of Reference: https://drive.google.com/file/d/13aZ6L08ke1-l32I7c00MahyEKgxeZkq8 [2] https://www.loomio.org/d/f0xNZQKg/open-board-meetings On Sat, 6 Nov 2021 at 07:31, Bruce Bannerman < bruce.bannerman.os...@gmail.com> wrote: > Colleagues, > > I have spent around 15 years with OSGeo-AustNZ and now OSGeo-Oceania. This > included working as a member of the FOSS4G-2009 Local Organising Committee. > > Eduardo is correct that in an open source community, communications MUST > be open. > > For OSGeo-Oceania this means the oceania@lists.osgeo.org list. > > If I look at our list archives [1], I find very little in the way of open > discussions. > > Imagine my surprise to find a FOSS4G event in Perth recently. I only > found this in passing on a LinkedIn thread. > > This and the email thread below, is symptomatic of an organisation in > trouble. > > We discussed the need for openness on this list over twelve months ago in > response to the problems that the then Oceania Board was having. It is > apparent that this advise has been ignored. > > I intend stepping back from OSGeo Oceania and focus my volunteer time > elsewhere. > > I’m currently a list administrator. I no longer wish to hold this role. I > suggest that the current board find a replacement. > > Kind regards, > > Bruce > > [1] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/oceania/ > > _______________________________________________ > Oceania mailing list > Oceania@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania >
_______________________________________________ Oceania mailing list Oceania@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania