Board voting ends today, but...
libv at skynet.be
Fri Feb 19 13:45:26 PST 2010
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 06:41:43PM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> I meant that, on average, everyone would presumably be happy with the
> board, as it reflects the opinion of everyone who voted. Presumably
> most people who didn't vote don't particularly care about the makeup of
> the board, and are just as happy either way.
I believe that quite a few people have voted the way they always used to
vote. Especially since it took a few days for me to find the time to
properly ask questions. People were used to vote without information,
and this is not normal.
> So yes, by virtue of having run an election with a reasonable
> participation rate (compared to historical average), I'm saying that the
> membership will -- on average -- be happy with the results.
> But I guess you knew that.
It seems that some of the membership is not overly happy with how this
result was achieved, and that there are potential members who just
cannot be bothered with membership.
> I have my own opinion, as a voter, as to who would best govern the
> Foundation, and I assume so do you. Anything I've done for the
> Foundation has been for the good of the Foundation, and not for getting
> my mates elected. I can confidently say that for the entirety of the
> outgoing board as well.
While we two might have our opinions as to who best is at the Xorg
Foundation board, it is not really staved by facts. I know some things
left and right, but i also do not get to see anything. So i too voted
just now from a gut feeling. Not a good basis for decision making.
> And that's fair. There's no technical role, so I guess it's just if
> you're interested in how money is collected and disbursed, essentially.
> If people are interested in that and we've failed to give them enough
> information to act on it, then yes, that's our failing. If people
> aren't interested in that, then I'm honestly not sure what to say.
It seems that people are interested, as i am not the only person to
speak up here now.
> It's just a shame no-one asked until the elections began, I guess;
> certainly having this all sorted out before the election would've made
> the whole thing a great deal less complicated.
As mentioned in the threads before:
* nothing ever happens except at election time.
* elections were shifted quite often and eventually got sprung up on all
of us, one month after the last revised schedule.
* I was personally flapping around like a colibri on speed while trying
to get the coreboots and Xorg devrooms at FOSDEM to run as well as
> I'm just another member now. I've nothing to hide, nor did I as a board
> member. The other members are doing their level best to get as much
> information as possible out; the reality though is that we all have
> dayjobs and numerous other commitments than the Foundation, as I'm sure
> you understand from unichrome. But they're doing their best, and
> hopefully this information comes soon.
> If it's hugely objectionable, then I'd say a full recall election would
> be the best option, providing it gets significant support from the
> I think at this point I've said everything I possibly can say, often
> several times. So from here on in, I'm just another interested punter.
> Also, it's Friday night, so I'd rather not be staring at mutt; hope you
> have a good weekend too.
Don't take any of this personal, what i write are just honest and direct
answers to your reasoning before.
I appreciate the fact that you admit that you are unable to perform the
duties that one would expect a member of the board of directors to
perform. This is a bold and above all honest move. I also appreciate
that you are answering questions here, as there is far too little
response from several people.
More information about the xorg