Re: Agenda for board meeting on January 9th

2015-01-12 Thread Emmanuele Bassi
hi;

On 8 January 2015 at 14:29, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com wrote:

 I would like to ask the board
 to consider discussing establishing democratically elected formal roles so
 that those with specific interests can support the BoD carry out their work
 more effectively and strengthen the infrastructure of GNOME:

 (I suspect these roles may already exist but I am not sure whether they are
 elected roles or not or who currently manages them)

 Secretary
 Treasurer

these roles already exist, and are generally assigned to the elected
directors during the first board meeting.

currently, Andrea Veri is the secretary (hence why he sends the
minutes of the board meetings), and the treasurer is Ekaterina
Gerasimova.

you can see the various roles and who holds them on the wiki:
https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/

 (Although I am aware that there are teams who focus on some of these areas
 already, I am not sure if the following formal roles exist to manage those
 teams, at this time:)

 Publicity and Campaigns
 Events and Socials
 Research and Development
 Diversity and Equality
 Outreach and Engagement

most of these roles are covered by the Engagement (née Marketing team)
and by local teams. I'm not sure what Research  Development means.
if it's a technological role, then everything we do is, broadly
speaking, research and development. if you mean research and
development as exploring fund raising options and venues, then it
would be the primary role of an executive director. I'd very much like
to see a team devoted to event planning and sponsoring, working with
local teams where necessary, but mostly driving the organization of
conferences like GUADEC, GNOME.Asia, and the GNOME Summit.

I'm not entirely sure why these should be democratically elected. I
personally prefer very much a culture of do-ocracy, where those who
show up and do the work get to decide what and how to do it, as
opposed to various instances of backseat driving that we've all
experienced on various mailing lists.

we have various teams that operate as emanations of the Foundation
itself, but they tend to work as special interest groups or as
infrastructure-related groups.

ciao,
 Emmanuele.

-- 
https://www.bassi.io
[@] ebassi [@gmail.com]
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Agenda for board meeting on January 9th

2015-01-12 Thread Magdalen Berns
 the officers do not strictly need to be directors, i.e. the Board may
 appoint anybody to hold those offices after a vote, but it's the Board
 that votes, not the general membership of the Foundation; the members
 of the Foundation elect the Board, though.


I can't see any reason why that could cause a problem in the foreseeable
future. How about if you [the BoD] were to determine which (if any) common
areas you find you need specific support in and then advertise those
roles on the foundation list so you could vote on them between yourselves,
then? If you did decide you wanted to delegate in some area or other, I
would not mind helping you draft a description of it, if that would be
useful.

 As far as I am aware, nobody does any statistical research at GNOME. What
  informs strategic decisions?

 we don't do statistical research to decide what to work on. we're a
 volunteer-driver project, and volunteer work is not fungible — i.e.
 even if we did do statistical research and determined strategic
 decisions, we'd still need somebody to volunteer to implement them,
 and we could not rely on those decisions in a timely manner, thus
 defeating the whole point.


Determining whether seeking out answers about a given problem is going to
be practical depends on the situation, but personally I think there are
certainly instances where it could be beneficial not to rule out this
approach too hastily.

what we usually do is rely, for technical direction, on the
 maintainers that comprise the larger GNOME ecosystem; what they want
 to work on, what kind of directions they want to impel to the project.
 we have special interest groups that drive various aspects of the
 project — accessibility, documentation, internationalization, etc. —
 as well as other entities that work on the infrastructure and
 outreach. finally, we have the board, which is concerned with the
 overall ability of the project to sustain itself financially, as well
 as protect itself legally.


I know about that and technically, I am in one of the teams you mention.
:D. I produce a reasonable amount of code (and stuff) for GNOME, anyway...
What is less clear is whether there is the aforementioned stuff. :-)

Magdalen
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Agenda for board meeting on January 9th

2015-01-12 Thread Emmanuele Bassi
hi;

On 12 January 2015 at 16:55, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com wrote:

 these roles already exist, and are generally assigned to the elected
 directors during the first board meeting.


 Seems a bit unorthodox, but as long as they're willing and able to manage
 the additional workload I can't see anything wrong with that. :-)

it's not really unorthodox, as it's part of the Foundation's bylaws
— see Article X here:
http://www.gnome.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/bylaws.pdf


The officers of the Corporation shall be a Chairman of the Board (if
appointed by the
Board), a President, one or more Vice Presidents (the number thereof
to be determined
by the Board), a Secretary, a Treasurer and such other officers as may
be elected in
accordance with the provisions of this Article X.


in particular, by 10.2:


The officers of the Corporation, except such officers as may b e app
ointed in accordance
with the provisions of Section 10.3 or Section 10.5 of this Article X,
shall be chosen
annually by the Board.


the officers do not strictly need to be directors, i.e. the Board may
appoint anybody to hold those offices after a vote, but it's the Board
that votes, not the general membership of the Foundation; the members
of the Foundation elect the Board, though.

 currently, Andrea Veri is the secretary (hence why he sends the
 minutes of the board meetings), and the treasurer is Ekaterina
 Gerasimova.

 you can see the various roles and who holds them on the wiki:
 https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/


 Thanks for the information. I notice that there is no contact information
 for any of the teams or links to indicate who they are and what their
 currently working on. It seems unlikely that someone would easily be able to
 figure out how to help them out.

that's indeed a missing bit of information, but in general any
communication with the Board should go through bo...@gnome.org.

we could create aliases for all the officers that go through
bo...@gnome.org, so that stuff is tracked.

 I'm not sure what Research  Development means.

 if it's a technological role, then everything we do is, broadly
 speaking, research and development.


 As far as I am aware, nobody does any statistical research at GNOME. What
 informs strategic decisions?

we don't do statistical research to decide what to work on. we're a
volunteer-driver project, and volunteer work is not fungible — i.e.
even if we did do statistical research and determined strategic
decisions, we'd still need somebody to volunteer to implement them,
and we could not rely on those decisions in a timely manner, thus
defeating the whole point.

what we usually do is rely, for technical direction, on the
maintainers that comprise the larger GNOME ecosystem; what they want
to work on, what kind of directions they want to impel to the project.
we have special interest groups that drive various aspects of the
project — accessibility, documentation, internationalization, etc. —
as well as other entities that work on the infrastructure and
outreach. finally, we have the board, which is concerned with the
overall ability of the project to sustain itself financially, as well
as protect itself legally.

 I'd very much like to see a team devoted to event planning and sponsoring,
 working with
 local teams where necessary, but mostly driving the organization of
 conferences like GUADEC, GNOME.Asia, and the GNOME Summit.


 Would the events team not be in charge of that stuff?

yes, that would be the role of a more formally defined events team,
but right now the events team is usually any local team organizing
an event, plus the travel committee, plus the board of directors, plus
the engagement team.

 I'm not entirely sure why these should be democratically elected. I
 personally prefer very much a culture of do-ocracy, where those who
 show up and do the work get to decide what and how to do it, as
 opposed to various instances of backseat driving that we've all
 experienced on various mailing lists.


 I can't really comment on the examples you're thinking of, since it is not
 clear what you're referring to . However, I would have thought that in
 general people would be inclined to vote for those who they felt were most
 qualified to fill a role or they wouldn't vote at all. Like a democracy, a
 do-acracy only really works for the benefit of everyone if there is equal
 access to the same information and opportunities from the outset.

then we really need to get better at sharing information. :-)

still, I'm not sure holding official elections for points of contacts
for various teams, adding election terms and bylaws for each team
lead, as well as the administrative overhead that it entails is going
to do us any good. at a certain point, election fatigue creeps in.

we could use the mechanism provided us by the bylaws, and have the
board elect various officers, like it is empowered to do. that would
keep the overhead low, while improving the accountability.


Re: Agenda for board meeting on January 9th

2015-01-12 Thread Magdalen Berns
Hi Emmanuele,


 these roles already exist, and are generally assigned to the elected
 directors during the first board meeting.


Seems a bit unorthodox, but as long as they're willing and able to manage
the additional workload I can't see anything wrong with that. :-)

currently, Andrea Veri is the secretary (hence why he sends the
 minutes of the board meetings), and the treasurer is Ekaterina
 Gerasimova.

 you can see the various roles and who holds them on the wiki:
 https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/


Thanks for the information. I notice that there is no contact information
for any of the teams or links to indicate who they are and what their
currently working on. It seems unlikely that someone would easily be able
to figure out how to help them out.


 I'm not sure what Research  Development means.

if it's a technological role, then everything we do is, broadly
 speaking, research and development.


As far as I am aware, nobody does any statistical research at GNOME. What
informs strategic decisions?

I'd very much like to see a team devoted to event planning and sponsoring,
 working with
 local teams where necessary, but mostly driving the organization of
 conferences like GUADEC, GNOME.Asia, and the GNOME Summit.


Would the events team not be in charge of that stuff?


 I'm not entirely sure why these should be democratically elected. I
 personally prefer very much a culture of do-ocracy, where those who
 show up and do the work get to decide what and how to do it, as
 opposed to various instances of backseat driving that we've all
 experienced on various mailing lists.


I can't really comment on the examples you're thinking of, since it is not
clear what you're referring to . However, I would have thought that in
general people would be inclined to vote for those who they felt were most
qualified to fill a role or they wouldn't vote at all. Like a democracy, a
do-acracy only really works for the benefit of everyone if there is equal
access to the same information and opportunities from the outset.

Magdalen
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Agenda for board meeting on January 9th

2015-01-12 Thread Andrea Veri
2015-01-12 18:07 GMT+01:00 Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com:
 Hi Alexandre,

 No, that's not quite the same thing. Most of the core teams mentioned on
 https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/ do not appear on that list.

The GNOME Foundation Board of Directors has a meeting once every two
weeks where existing and previously assigned to-do items are reported
to the Board by the member in charge of that item after the relevant
preliminary activity has taken place. Once that happens and we have
enough material to base a vote on we discuss the findings and start a
vote which will lead to a result we do consider as final for that
request, issue, dispute.

To-do items and private notes on a specific argument aren't public as
they are most likely suggested to change while the preliminary
activity moves forward or when the Board starts discussing a specific
item and further activity occurs. Additionally the Board has no core
teams internally but specific members taking care of managing
particular tasks within the Board itself. We value transparency and we
make sure the meeting minutes contain every single item we discussed
on a meeting (except for private items we do not disclose as per
requestor request or argument, i.e Groupon) with a detailed overview.
Foundation members are also encouraged to ask for more details if any
of the reported items are unclear.

Many of the teams you proposed do exist already, what kind of
contributions would you be interested in?

-- 
Cheers,

Andrea

Debian Developer,
Fedora / EPEL packager,
GNOME Infrastructure Team Coordinator,
GNOME Foundation Board of Directors Secretary,
GNOME Foundation Membership  Elections Committee Chairman

Homepage: http://www.gnome.org/~av
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Agenda for board meeting on January 9th

2015-01-12 Thread Alexandre Franke
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com wrote:
 Thanks for the information. I notice that there is no contact information
 for any of the teams or links to indicate who they are and what their
 currently working on. It seems unlikely that someone would easily be able to
 figure out how to help them out.

You mean something like https://wiki.gnome.org/Teams that is linked
prominently from the front page of the wiki?

-- 
Alexandre Franke
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list


Re: Agenda for board meeting on January 9th

2015-01-12 Thread Magdalen Berns
Hi Alexandre,

No, that's not quite the same thing. Most of the core teams mentioned on
https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/ do not appear on that list.

Magdalen


On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Alexandre Franke 
alexandre.fra...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Magdalen Berns m.be...@thismagpie.com
 wrote:
  Thanks for the information. I notice that there is no contact information
  for any of the teams or links to indicate who they are and what their
  currently working on. It seems unlikely that someone would easily be
 able to
  figure out how to help them out.

 You mean something like https://wiki.gnome.org/Teams that is linked
 prominently from the front page of the wiki?

 --
 Alexandre Franke
 ___
 foundation-list mailing list
 foundation-list@gnome.org
 https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list