Re: About the unpublished board meeting minutes
Maybe I missed something but are these unpublished board meeting minutes published by now? If not when will they be available Regards, Jaap 2009/6/4 Anne Østergaard : > About the unpublished board meeting minutes. > > The board is responsible. > > It has been mentioned on this list a couple of times that people are > missing information from the board meetings. > > Behdad as chairman of the board said: > "These are two different issues. I believe I made it clear that: > > 1) Minutes have been taken. > > 2) We'll try to publish them before elections. > > If minutes hadn't been taken we couldn't publish them now. So while you > may reason that unpublished minutes are as good as no minutes, it's not > exactly like that since unpublished ones *can* be published now. > > behdad" > > > I find it serious that the board who is serving 18 months instead of 12 > months has neglected to publish board meeting minutes over a long > period of time. > > The Foundation Members can not be expected to take part of, or react on > missing information from The GNOME Foundation Board of Directors. > > Remember that we have now 7 board members. Before we had 11 members of the > board. > > In case the missing minutes are not published before the elections > start, I will not vote for re-election of any of the present board members. > > Other GNOME Foundation Members might feel the same way. > > Please point us to the latest, and updated version og GNOME Foundation > bylaws. Which I hope all of us has read. > > Can the candidates all confirm that they have read the Foundation bylaws? > > Kind regards > > Anne > > > > > > > > Delete & Prev | Delete & Next > > > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > -- blog: http://jaap.haitsma.org ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: About the unpublished board meeting minutes
2009/6/5 Vincent Untz : > Le vendredi 05 juin 2009, à 00:29 -0400, Germán Póo-Caamaño a écrit : >> I have some concerns, it seems longer than is needed (it defines roles >> as president, vice-president, agents and things that does not seem to >> fit with our Foundation. However, IANAL). > > Luis had started something to update the by-laws, I believe. He can > probably comment on this. I was working on this, but it was low priority. If you search co-ment.net for 'GNOME bylaws' I believe you'll find the start of that work. I am writing this offline and not on my primary machine so no access to the documents. There are a couple different issues here, from memory: (1) some of the issues German mentions are just unfortunate artifacts of standard cut'n'paste corporate formation. Some of them probably could be simplified, but many probably could not. I (and everyone else) should be very loathe to touch any of those things without the advice of a California non-profit law expert. (2) Some parts of it are horribly vague because of poor drafting on our part originally. For example, if I recall correctly the voting provisions refer to a webpage as the primary determinant of how we vote, so to change how we vote, just find the webpage in git, commit the change, and voila! you've changed how the Foundation votes. (I wish I was kidding.) These things can and should be adjusted and changed. Brian also had helped create a useful list of these (which I think, again, are in co-ment.net.) (3) amendments are not incorporated into the body in a single place. If nothing else, this needs to be done, for the sake of documentation/readability. (4) We still refer in a number of places to the charter, which needs revision, not because it is unclear (it is quite well written for what it is) but to update it to reflect who we are now, nearly 10 years later- which is a different beast than what we were then. This may also suggest some parallel changes to the bylaws. All that said, I think reading the bylaws is overrated. Obviously we have legal obligations which should be understood and respected, but by and large the bylaws say very little about what we should do or how we should do it. Those are the bigger questions we face, and the bylaws have no answer for them. Luis ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: About the unpublished board meeting minutes
Hi German, Germán Póo-Caamaño wrote: I have some concerns, it seems longer than is needed (it defines roles as president, vice-president, agents and things that does not seem to fit with our Foundation. However, IANAL). There is a certain amount of legalese that you need to be a Californian corporation (which we are). Pretty much every corporation needs a president, secretary and treasurer, who are the officers of the foundation. Those are legally required, I believe. The "agent" text looks like boilerplate to me - you need to cover the asses of people acting on behalf of the foundation (that's what an "agent" is). Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: About the unpublished board meeting minutes
Le vendredi 05 juin 2009, à 00:29 -0400, Germán Póo-Caamaño a écrit : > On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 00:04 +0200, Anne Østergaard wrote: > > [...] > > Can the candidates all confirm that they have read the Foundation bylaws? > > I read it. (I did too, but not this year) > I have some concerns, it seems longer than is needed (it defines roles > as president, vice-president, agents and things that does not seem to > fit with our Foundation. However, IANAL). Luis had started something to update the by-laws, I believe. He can probably comment on this. Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: About the unpublished board meeting minutes
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 00:04 +0200, Anne Østergaard wrote: > [...] > Can the candidates all confirm that they have read the Foundation bylaws? I read it. I have some concerns, it seems longer than is needed (it defines roles as president, vice-president, agents and things that does not seem to fit with our Foundation. However, IANAL). Kind regards, -- Germán Póo-Caamaño Concepción - Chile http://www.gnome.org/~gpoo/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
About the unpublished board meeting minutes
About the unpublished board meeting minutes. The board is responsible. It has been mentioned on this list a couple of times that people are missing information from the board meetings. Behdad as chairman of the board said: "These are two different issues. I believe I made it clear that: 1) Minutes have been taken. 2) We'll try to publish them before elections. If minutes hadn't been taken we couldn't publish them now. So while you may reason that unpublished minutes are as good as no minutes, it's not exactly like that since unpublished ones *can* be published now. behdad" I find it serious that the board who is serving 18 months instead of 12 months has neglected to publish board meeting minutes over a long period of time. The Foundation Members can not be expected to take part of, or react on missing information from The GNOME Foundation Board of Directors. Remember that we have now 7 board members. Before we had 11 members of the board. In case the missing minutes are not published before the elections start, I will not vote for re-election of any of the present board members. Other GNOME Foundation Members might feel the same way. Please point us to the latest, and updated version og GNOME Foundation bylaws. Which I hope all of us has read. Can the candidates all confirm that they have read the Foundation bylaws? Kind regards Anne Delete & Prev | Delete & Next ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
