On 25.05.2016 21:36, Matthew Dixon Cowles wrote:
> Marc-Andre,
>> Changes to bylaws are usually implemented by the board. They can
>> also be put up to vote with the voting members and for larger
>> changes, the board will generally take that approach.
>> In this particular case, this wasn't deemed necessary,
> Thank you, that is an answer to my question.
> I disagree. In my opinion the matter is important enough that it
> should have been, and still should be, decided by the members.
> The reason I think that is that the approval of the PSF's sources of
> funding is an important kind of oversight. If the membership is to
> give up that oversight, I think it should do so voluntarily and
> unambiguously, not because of a decision the board makes by itself.

Thank you for explaining your concern in more detail. This makes
it easier to understand why you think we should have put this
up for a members vote.

Please note that most of the PSF's funding is generated not
through direct PSF sponsors, but instead through profit generated
via running the PyCon US conference. Those sources of funding have
(so far) never been subject to membership approval, not even
board approval. The PyCon US chair is responsible for those

If you have concerns about which sources of funding the
PSF uses, please sign up for the sponsors WG to help with the
decision process and policies.

If you believe we should do a members vote on this, you
can raise this on the psf-vote list. If there's enough demand,
I doubt that the coming board will reject the wish to
run a members vote on the topic.

All that said, oversight over the funding of the PSF is
one of the main responsibilities of the board and even if the
sponsor selection is delegated to a WG, the board remains
ultimately responsible for any decisions in this direction.

Some background:

The main reason members had to vote on sponsors under the
version 1 bylaws was that sponsors gained voting rights. Otherwise,
the board would have been able to take on this decision process
by itself and relief the members from this duty (the board has
in most cases done pre-screening of the candidates all along).

Under the version 2 bylaws, anyone can self certify
as voting member, so while sponsors now no longer have
voting rights, they can still have employees, engaging in
Python community work, gain voting rights. In the end,
removing the sponsor membership class is not really a
practical loss.

Marc-Andre Lemburg
Python Software Foundation
PSF-Community mailing list

Reply via email to