Humanitarian OSM Team/Working groups/Governance/2015-08-14

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Aug 14 16:02:03 BlakeGirardot: Greetings
Aug 14 16:02:11 mkl: hello!
Aug 14 16:02:32 BlakeGirardot: Hi mkl I am thinking we should move the Governance WG meeting to voice
Aug 14 16:02:47 mkl: that wont work for me
Aug 14 16:03:18 mkl: theres a ton of noise here
Aug 14 16:03:35 mkl: they're refinishing the floor upstairs
Aug 14 16:03:39 BlakeGirardot: Ok, no problem.
Aug 14 16:03:58 BlakeGirardot: Is anyone else here for the Governance Working Group meeting?
Aug 14 16:04:10 russdeffner: hello, I am
Aug 14 16:04:15 BlakeGirardot: Hi russdeffner
Aug 14 16:04:48 BlakeGirardot: I am going to wait a few minutes
Aug 14 16:04:59 BlakeGirardot: I am sure everyone is just stuck in traffic.
Aug 14 16:05:28 BlakeGirardot: Agenda and notes are here:
Aug 14 16:08:42 BlakeGirardot: #commands
Aug 14 16:08:47 mkl: we should start
Aug 14 16:08:49 BlakeGirardot: #startmeeting
Aug 14 16:08:49 hot_meetbot: BlakeGirardot: Error: A meeting name is required, e.g., '#startmeeting Marketing Committee'
Aug 14 16:09:09 BlakeGirardot: #startmeeting Governance Working Group - Aug 14 Regular Meeting
Aug 14 16:09:09 hot_meetbot: Meeting started Fri Aug 14 14:09:10 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is BlakeGirardot. Information about MeetBot at
Aug 14 16:09:09 hot_meetbot: Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
Aug 14 16:09:09 --- hot_meetbot has changed the topic to: (Meeting topic: Governance Working Group - Aug 14 Regular Meeting) Aug 14 16:09:09 hot_meetbot: The meeting name has been set to 'governance_working_group___aug_14_regular_meeting'
Aug 14 16:09:16 BlakeGirardot: #commands
Aug 14 16:09:16 hot_meetbot: Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #reject #rejected #restrictlogs #save #showvote #startmeeting #startvote #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote
Aug 14 16:09:30 BlakeGirardot: Ok, lets call this meeting to order
Aug 14 16:09:47 BlakeGirardot: Welcome to the Governance WG August Regular meeting.
Aug 14 16:10:14 BlakeGirardot: Agenda for today is here:
Aug 14 16:10:39 BlakeGirardot:
Aug 14 16:11:10 BlakeGirardot: First order of business is to review and approve the minutes from our special meeting last week.
Aug 14 16:11:24 BlakeGirardot:
Aug 14 16:11:35 BlakeGirardot: #topic Approve previous meeting minutes
Aug 14 16:11:35 --- hot_meetbot has changed the topic to: Approve previous meeting minutes (Meeting topic: Governance Working Group - Aug 14 Regular Meeting) Aug 14 16:11:45 russdeffner: since I typed those, I am happy with them; mkl - see anything you'd like changed, since it was basically just the two of us?
Aug 14 16:12:10 mkl: looks fine
Aug 14 16:13:08 BlakeGirardot: Ok, normally I would entertain a motion to approve
Aug 14 16:13:17 BlakeGirardot: but I think we can skip that for today
Aug 14 16:13:37 BlakeGirardot: Lets just say without objection the minutes from the previous meeting are adopted.
Aug 14 16:13:51 mkl: ok
Aug 14 16:14:05 BlakeGirardot: Moving on to Old Business
Aug 14 16:14:19 BlakeGirardot: #topic Agenda Item - Old Business
Aug 14 16:14:19 --- hot_meetbot has changed the topic to: Agenda Item - Old Business (Meeting topic: Governance Working Group - Aug 14 Regular Meeting) Aug 14 16:14:25 russdeffner: agree
Aug 14 16:14:38 BlakeGirardot: Russ can you remind the Chair of the issue related to the meeting quickly?
Aug 14 16:14:56 BlakeGirardot: Meeting times or frequency?
Aug 14 16:15:03 russdeffner: So, there are a few 'unfinished' things from that meeting
Aug 14 16:15:32 russdeffner: but the tabled item (6) was to discuss the meeting date/time and frequency
Aug 14 16:16:19 russdeffner: I basically just tossed the GWG in between the Communication WG meetings which are every other Friday, but made GWG every 4 weeks
Aug 14 16:16:44 russdeffner: at our bootstrap discussion we talked about due to workload, making the GWG meet every other week
Aug 14 16:16:44 BlakeGirardot: Ok, so we should Doodle a regular time / day
Aug 14 16:16:47 BlakeGirardot: ?
Aug 14 16:16:49 mkl: we need to be more frequent ... possible every week
Aug 14 16:16:55 mkl: or every other week sure
Aug 14 16:17:05 BlakeGirardot: I agree, for the short term we need at least every other week.
Aug 14 16:17:06 mkl: let's doodle for the time ... friday is not ideal for me
Aug 14 16:17:29 BlakeGirardot: Lets shoot for every week for a few months so we can get some things finalized
Aug 14 16:17:40 mkl: _1
Aug 14 16:17:41 russdeffner: I'm ok with doodling, but we also need to 'eliminate' overlap with the other wgs
Aug 14 16:17:43 mkl: +1
Aug 14 16:17:58 BlakeGirardot: #agreed Doodle for a regular time/day for the GWG meeting
Aug 14 16:17:58 russdeffner: the middle of the week is pretty open
Aug 14 16:18:01 mkl: is there a master calendar russdeffner?
Aug 14 16:18:13 russdeffner: yep, let me get the link
Aug 14 16:18:14 BlakeGirardot: #agreed We should meeting once a week for at least 2 months.
Aug 14 16:19:17 russdeffner:
Aug 14 16:20:11 mkl: thx
Aug 14 16:21:03 BlakeGirardot: So shall we table this item to the next meeting?
Aug 14 16:21:08 russdeffner: so, maybe an 'action'?
Aug 14 16:21:13 BlakeGirardot: Sounds good
Aug 14 16:21:25 russdeffner: someone to make and send doodle around?
Aug 14 16:21:59 BlakeGirardot: #action Send out a Doodle poll to determine the best time day for the Regular Governance WG meeting.
Aug 14 16:22:13 BlakeGirardot: I'll take care of the poll
Aug 14 16:22:19 russdeffner: great, thanks
Aug 14 16:22:20 BlakeGirardot: Any objection to moving on then?
Aug 14 16:22:36 mkl: go ahead
Aug 14 16:22:38 russdeffner: not from me, sounds 'resolved'
Aug 14 16:23:20 BlakeGirardot: #topic Agenda Item - New Business - Membership issues
Aug 14 16:23:21 --- hot_meetbot has changed the topic to: Agenda Item - New Business - Membership issues (Meeting topic: Governance Working Group - Aug 14 Regular Meeting) Aug 14 16:24:17 BlakeGirardot: So there are two issues here
Aug 14 16:24:30 BlakeGirardot: Lets start with issues related to election of new members
Aug 14 16:24:49 russdeffner: #info Existing document for commenting on membership election process:
Aug 14 16:25:05 BlakeGirardot: Nice, ty russ
Aug 14 16:25:13 BlakeGirardot: #link
Aug 14 16:27:00 russdeffner: I think there are two aspects - 1) Are our bylaws restricting/damaging our new member election practices
Aug 14 16:27:26 BlakeGirardot: Ya, I see two parts as well by-laws and process
Aug 14 16:27:29 russdeffner: and 2) what are we doing 'outside' of the bylaws (i.e. the logistics of election process) that can be improved
Aug 14 16:27:58 mkl: yes the entire process of nomination and ballotting is outside of the bylaws
Aug 14 16:28:06 mkl: we should look at our goals for the process
Aug 14 16:28:16 BlakeGirardot: I agree
Aug 14 16:28:44 BlakeGirardot: Right now it is "difficult" to be voted a member, but very easy to stay a member.
Aug 14 16:28:56 mkl: one thing is that members coming in should be properly introduced to other members, to what HOT membership is about. a lot more communication
Aug 14 16:29:01 BlakeGirardot: I wonder if we should not try and move the balance a bit.
Aug 14 16:29:10 mkl: agree it should be easier to leave
Aug 14 16:29:14 BlakeGirardot: Easier to become a member, more difficult to stay a memeber.
Aug 14 16:29:27 mkl: i don't think it's that hard to become a member, actually the oppostie
Aug 14 16:29:35 mkl: all that happens, you are nominated, and voted in
Aug 14 16:29:55 BlakeGirardot: Interesting
Aug 14 16:29:56 mkl: you don't even need to understand what membership entails to become a member
Aug 14 16:30:04 russdeffner: #idea I would suggest we don't make a bylaws change related to new member elections at this time; let's first try to improve process
Aug 14 16:30:10 mkl: +1
Aug 14 16:30:30 mkl: and we can consider member leaving hot seperately
Aug 14 16:30:32 russdeffner: longer nomination and voting period?
Aug 14 16:30:48 mkl: maybe it's not even a nomination as such
Aug 14 16:30:51 BlakeGirardot: Statement of motivation?
Aug 14 16:31:01 BlakeGirardot: for becoming a member?
Aug 14 16:31:13 russdeffner: not using google sheet for collecting 'nomination blurb'
Aug 14 16:31:20 BlakeGirardot: I was just feeling 2/3 was a pretty high bar
Aug 14 16:31:28 BlakeGirardot: for being voted in.
Aug 14 16:31:38 russdeffner: clearly telling existing members to only nominate people they have actually talked to about it
Aug 14 16:31:56 mkl: well that is something consider, since good nominations have not gone through
Aug 14 16:32:02 russdeffner: last time there were at least 2 people who were nominated without knowing they were nominated
Aug 14 16:32:15 mkl: and the person nominating should have some responsibility to mentor that person
Aug 14 16:32:25 russdeffner: +1
Aug 14 16:32:46 mkl: i would say that a nomination doesn't necessarily lead to a vote, there could be another step
Aug 14 16:33:06 mkl: someone is nominated, there is a length of time that they are introduced and learn about HOT membership responsibilities
Aug 14 16:33:35 russdeffner: oh, I should have known; time to bust out the bylaws (why did I think I could make it through this meeting without having them open)
Aug 14 16:34:26 mkl: only then do they decide if they want to actually join
Aug 14 16:34:36 russdeffner: so, nomination is basically the requirement
Aug 14 16:34:54 BlakeGirardot: Ya, the bylaws are really quite on the whole issue.
Aug 14 16:35:54 mkl: so what i imagine is a nomination, a period of introduction and mentoring (2 months?), an explicit decision by the nominated member to go for membership, then a vote
Aug 14 16:36:21 russdeffner: my reading of article 3.5 summary: there are two bylaws requirments for new member election - 1.nominated by existing member and 2. received "2/3 written consent"
Aug 14 16:36:29 mkl: this also gives the membership time to see what the new member actually wants to do
Aug 14 16:37:34 russdeffner: I think that sounds like a pretty good idea
Aug 14 16:37:59 BlakeGirardot: Ya, I think there needs to be a more public process
Aug 14 16:38:13 BlakeGirardot: for people almost campainging to join.
Aug 14 16:38:34 russdeffner: I have a concern though...
Aug 14 16:38:35 BlakeGirardot: or we go the other way and somehow agree that members will take a lot more responsibility
Aug 14 16:38:49 BlakeGirardot: for their nominations so we can trust those nominations
Aug 14 16:39:01 BlakeGirardot: and sort of assume, if nominated, they are good fit for the org.
Aug 14 16:39:10 BlakeGirardot: I know I would take my nomination pretty seriously.
Aug 14 16:39:10 russdeffner: if we make the process 'super long', will it fall onto the chairperson's shoulders to be constantly involved for that whole length of time
Aug 14 16:39:22 BlakeGirardot: not nesscisarily russdeffner
Aug 14 16:39:29 russdeffner: yes, I hope so
Aug 14 16:39:48 BlakeGirardot: The nominee should have the full responsibility to make sure the process has a good outcome for them.
Aug 14 16:40:00 russdeffner: so my point is that whatever 'mechanisms' we build, that they don't need chairperson 'hand-holding' the whole time
Aug 14 16:40:59 russdeffner: I can see we give this greater amount of time and then nothing happens until the end and we basically have the same thing - the chairperson scrambling to make all these contacts in a few weeks
Aug 14 16:41:17 BlakeGirardot: I think we can avoid that
Aug 14 16:41:25 russdeffner: for your information, last time I sent a minimum of 3 emails to every candidate and nominator
Aug 14 16:41:28 BlakeGirardot: This is 100% on the person seeking membership.
Aug 14 16:41:42 mkl: i think the chairperson just needs to be responsible for the overall timing of the process
Aug 14 16:41:59 mkl: it's really up to the nominators and nominees
Aug 14 16:42:06 russdeffner: yes, in theory
Aug 14 16:42:12 russdeffner: hasn't happened in practice
Aug 14 16:42:18 mkl: if they don't respond, to a reasonable attempt to communicate, then they don't qualify
Aug 14 16:42:38 mkl: this is a very low bar to being a member, being responsive to emails
Aug 14 16:42:49 russdeffner: but not a requirment :)
Aug 14 16:42:58 russdeffner: only a nomination and 2/3 approval
Aug 14 16:42:59 mkl: well it kind of becomes a requirement here
Aug 14 16:43:26 mkl: if they don't respond to say they want to be a member after the 2 month period, then they don't move forward to the approval process
Aug 14 16:43:37 mkl: actually
Aug 14 16:43:42 mkl: to fit with the bylaws
Aug 14 16:43:45 russdeffner: I can honestly say that some people who 'easily' were elected, have never responded to an email from me
Aug 14 16:44:01 mkl: the actual "nomination" doesnt happen until after the introductory period
Aug 14 16:44:25 mkl: russdeffner ... well that can't continue. and it should be grounds for dismissal, if it's a pattern
Aug 14 16:44:29 mkl: but that's another matter
Aug 14 16:44:34 russdeffner: ok, maybe I was wrong about needing a bylaws change
Aug 14 16:45:03 russdeffner: another aspect is this clause: nominate a new voting member at the annual meeting or at any special meeting of the voting members.
Aug 14 16:45:21 BlakeGirardot: Ya, that will probably need altering eventually
Aug 14 16:45:26 russdeffner: not sure how this would work with the 2/3 requirement
Aug 14 16:45:46 russdeffner: but in theory, we can't stop a member nominating someone at a meeting with 'no warning'
Aug 14 16:46:55 mkl: i think that should be changed
Aug 14 16:47:14 BlakeGirardot: In theory that could be an issue
Aug 14 16:47:26 BlakeGirardot: maybe
Aug 14 16:47:39 BlakeGirardot: But I dont see a last minute nomination getting 2/3s
Aug 14 16:47:53 russdeffner: I don't see 2/3 members at any meeting :)
Aug 14 16:48:07 BlakeGirardot: exactly
Aug 14 16:48:36 mkl: i meant the ability to nominate at the meeting without warning
Aug 14 16:49:01 mkl: broader sense, meetings shouldn't allow for surprises
Aug 14 16:49:10 russdeffner: yes, but basically it would be fruitless to try, since there will never be enough people to approve
Aug 14 16:49:11 mkl: but again a topic for another time
Aug 14 16:49:49 russdeffner: however, back to concrete suggestions - we need to reword article 3.5 to say new members are elected by ballot
Aug 14 16:49:51 BlakeGirardot: So can we sum up and agree on anything here related to new member election process?
Aug 14 16:50:11 BlakeGirardot: longer "nomination" period?
Aug 14 16:50:16 mkl: i think an action would be to write up the new process and the bylaw changes
Aug 14 16:50:30 BlakeGirardot: Ya, but lets agree what they should entail
Aug 14 16:50:37 BlakeGirardot: longer nomination period
Aug 14 16:50:52 BlakeGirardot: more from the nominees themselves
Aug 14 16:50:59 BlakeGirardot: like a motivation statement
Aug 14 16:51:26 BlakeGirardot: structural changes to the bylaws to support balloting
Aug 14 16:51:41 BlakeGirardot: must be nominated ahead of time
Aug 14 16:52:23 mkl: there is an "introduction period" before the formal nomination, where they need to accept
Aug 14 16:52:48 mkl: we should also have guidance for nominators to mentor the new potential members
Aug 14 16:53:21 mkl: sorry, I have to leave in a minute, after we decide on this item
Aug 14 16:53:39 BlakeGirardot: Ya, the rest of this will have to carry over to the next meeting... next week hopfully
Aug 14 16:53:41 russdeffner: I also need to go at the top of the hour
Aug 14 16:53:58 mkl: shall we aim to have something drafted for next week's meeting
Aug 14 16:54:02 BlakeGirardot: yes
Aug 14 16:54:12 russdeffner: so, maybe we can agree to draft 2 things, a bylaws amendment and an updating new member election process
Aug 14 16:54:22 mkl: also i likely can't make next week, will be travelling, but will try
Aug 14 16:54:24 BlakeGirardot: #action Draft suggested revised election proceedures
Aug 14 16:54:47 BlakeGirardot: #action Draft possible by-laws changes to support improved new member election process
Aug 14 16:54:47 russdeffner: I have a space for the bylaw amendment already going here...
Aug 14 16:54:49 russdeffner:
Aug 14 16:55:38 russdeffner: and that should look nice in the bot minutes :)
Aug 14 16:55:43 mkl: i gotta run
Aug 14 16:55:44 mkl: bye
Aug 14 16:55:56 russdeffner: thanks mkl, chat soon
Aug 14 16:56:21 BlakeGirardot: Thank you mkl, by
Aug 14 16:56:23 BlakeGirardot: e
Aug 14 16:56:41 BlakeGirardot: I am going to hold the remainder of the meeting on mumble
Aug 14 16:56:53 BlakeGirardot: for expediency.
Aug 14 16:56:59 BlakeGirardot: without objection
Aug 14 16:57:03 BlakeGirardot: ?
Aug 14 17:02:43 BlakeGirardot: Ok, I am going to table the next two agenda items to our next special or regular meeting.
Aug 14 17:04:29 BlakeGirardot: #info Table Membership - Existing members
Aug 14 17:04:43 BlakeGirardot: #info Table Director's Terms
Aug 14 17:04:59 BlakeGirardot: #info Table Resolve 3.3 and 4.5 conflict
Aug 14 17:05:11 BlakeGirardot: Any New Business?
Aug 14 17:05:23 BlakeGirardot: Not hearing any New Business
Aug 14 17:05:31 BlakeGirardot: I suggest we adjourn
Aug 14 17:05:37 BlakeGirardot: Any objections?
Aug 14 17:05:37 russdeffner: not from me, thanks for chairing Blake
Aug 14 17:05:53 BlakeGirardot: Thank you russdeffner and mkl
Aug 14 17:06:52 BlakeGirardot: This meeting is adjourned
Aug 14 17:06:57 BlakeGirardot: #endmeeting
Aug 14 17:06:57 --- hot_meetbot has changed the topic to: Nepal Earthquake | #hot log: Aug 14 17:06:57 hot_meetbot: Meeting ended Fri Aug 14 15:06:58 2015 UTC. Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)
Aug 14 17:06:57 hot_meetbot: Minutes:
Aug 14 17:06:57 hot_meetbot: Minutes (text):
Aug 14 17:06:57 hot_meetbot: Log: