On 28 May 2016, at 7:15, Carl Karsten wrote:

All of the people nominated for the PSF board are good people who will do good things. If things were running smooth, I wouldn't really care who
gets elected.

But once again, we see people asking questions due to lack of transparency.

So once again, I ask:  What will you do about it?

I think others raise good points and Diana has very accurately reflected the current PSF board operations and communications.

Personally, I would advocate for actions that continue to increase the level of transparency:

- publishing an annual calendar of board meetings at the beginning of each term - releasing board meeting agendas to the community prior to the board meetings by posting the meeting agenda on the website ideally 72 hours before a scheduled meeting - drafting a meeting agenda that defaults to information being public but also allows for an executive session portion of the agenda for items where confidentiality is important i.e. anonymity requested by a donor, personnel discussions, etc. - listening and responding to community questions in a timely, thoughtful, and respectful manner

We could consider new ways to gain feedback from the community about specific areas that the community would like to see greater transparency. Perhaps offering a mid-term survey of community satisfaction on a number of topics including transparency to get a representative sense of “How are we doing as a board?”. A link could be posted at the bottom of agendas where community members can easily email the entire board thoughts about agenda items.



Carol Willing
Research Software Engineer, Project Jupyter @ Cal Poly
Director, Python Software Foundation
PSF-Community mailing list

Reply via email to