#OSGEO Log: 2017-10-26

13:58:19jgarnett:good morning
13:58:46jgarnett:we are hopefully starting a quick board meeting at the request of our CRO
13:58:55jgarnett:I think all the board members have responded via email.
13:59:07jgarnett:I wish we had thought to ask the candidates to respond
14:01:31jgarnett:shall we start?
14:01:45vcraciunescu:hi jgarnett and all!
14:02:20jgarnett:g'day vcraciunescu - thanks for all you have done!
14:02:40vcraciunescu:thank you all for your patience and support!
14:03:56jgarnett:looking on the irc list I am trying to determine if we have enough board members present to have a meeting
14:04:11jgarnett:can I ask who is attending?
14:04:31jgarnett:jgarnett: here
14:05:27vcraciunescu:vcraciunescu: here
14:05:36vcraciunescu:more as an observer though :)
14:06:13jgarnett:sending an email reminder to the board list
14:06:25vcraciunescu:please do
14:06:30jgarnett:I expect the board members, like everyone else, are a bit tired of this one.
14:06:31vcraciunescu:kalxas_: are you here?
14:06:41jgarnett:(and not quite as tired as vcraciunescu )
14:07:34vcraciunescu:vcraciunescu: just had a long conference day. it’s his pleasure to meet good friend from the community :)
14:08:06jgarnett:It seems that the majority of board members have responded to your email vcraciunescu, but not everyone.
14:08:19vcraciunescu:true
14:08:32vcraciunescu:but I think we have a qualified majority
14:08:46jgarnett:the board list had a similar discussion on Oct 21st "Current election cycle discussion"
14:09:39vcraciunescu:the important subject is if I will make public the election result or we are going for a full reset
14:09:43jgarnett:vcraciunescu: Still we are a bit stuck this morning, not enough present to hold a meeting.
14:09:55jgarnett:And not a strong response by the board for you to feel comfortable.
14:09:56vcraciunescu:and I think the second option is not really an option for anyone
14:10:05jgarnett:What I can do is start a loomio motion
14:10:18jgarnett:and we can ask the board members to vote formally
14:10:30vcraciunescu:that will require a little bit more time
14:10:33jgarnett:(it requires 100% response rate though according to our bylaws)
14:10:36vcraciunescu:not a problem from my side
14:10:50jgarnett:So I would prefer to wait a few more mins in the hope board members can attend.
14:11:02vcraciunescu:on the other hand, is not good for the community to delay the result publication too much
14:11:12vcraciunescu:that is no problem
14:11:34kalxas_:hi vcraciunescu
14:12:27jgarnett:So let's give the email reminder a shot at reaching quorum.
14:12:33vcraciunescu:ok
14:13:01jgarnett:I the mean time I will start a loomio motion for the record, but I may need a hand wording it.
14:13:13jgarnett:(some of the emails got into double negatives which were hard to follow)
14:14:18vcraciunescu:hi Angelos!
14:19:36jgarnett:Do we have quorum? Looks ike we need 5 board members present.
14:19:59vcraciunescu:only 3 online
14:20:11jgarnett:I have started a loomio thread here - https://www.loomio.org/d/PauIx2jl
14:20:11vcraciunescu:mdsmith_offline: looks offline :)
14:20:12sigq:Title: Loomio (at www.loomio.org)
14:22:10jgarnett:so vcraciunescu thsi meeting comes down to one paragraph of your email:
14:22:27jgarnett:> In any case, the board should have an opinion before the results are made public. To give time to board members to react, I plan to release the results of the vote on Thursday 17:00 GMT. If needed, more time can be allocated. However, deciding on the way to go further after seeing the results can only escalate the possible conflict of interest.
14:23:13jgarnett:We have a reaction via email, but not from all board members.
14:23:56vcraciunescu:jgarnett: true
14:24:13jgarnett:I am going to gather up the email responses like a good scribe in that loomio thread.
14:24:36jgarnett:but prgamatically I think you have a judgement call to make here
14:24:38vcraciunescu:thank you a lot Jody!
14:24:59jgarnett:you can review the email responses; we do have a response from everyone split across different email threads.
14:25:14jgarnett:but i would totally support you waiting for the board members to official vote
14:25:23jgarnett:(or for two more to show up here to reach quorum)
14:25:37jgarnett:I am sorry mate; I feel like the board is letting you down.
14:25:48vcraciunescu:I obviously must abstain
14:25:58vcraciunescu:but you can count my vote as 0
14:26:14vcraciunescu:jgarnett: don’t worry. it was on very short time
14:26:29jgarnett:can you help me word a motion that is not full of double negatives
14:26:41jgarnett:(noticed what I did there, ha ha ha)
14:26:41vcraciunescu:sure
14:27:36vcraciunescu:anitagraser: is here :)
14:27:43anitagraser:hi
14:27:50jgarnett:woot, one more needed for quorum
14:27:55vcraciunescu:hi Anita!
14:27:56jgarnett:welcome anitagraser good to see you
14:28:41* kalxas_ checking e-mails, just came out of multiple meetings
14:29:44* anitagraser reading the log
14:30:57jgarnett:TLDR: waiting for quorum, starting loomio thread as a backup (but that would delay election result anouncements until we hve 100% response rate)
14:31:42anitagraser:ok, so we need some motions now, e.g. if there should be another voting, and some motions will be for the future board to make, e.g. updating the rules
14:33:37vcraciunescu:updating the rules is sure a task for the next board
14:33:44jgarnett:think we are focusing on motion, accepting the election resulsts
14:33:50vcraciunescu:anyway, thanks to jgarnett for the comprehensive proposal
14:33:56jgarnett:vcraciunescu: any progress on wording that motion?
14:33:58vcraciunescu:all sounding very good
14:34:16jgarnett:no worries vcraciunescu glad to help, gives me something to do while we wait
14:34:45vcraciunescu:sorry for that. I had the impression that you are drafting something and you want me to contribute… my bad as I’m still in a conference. I will draft the motion ASAP
14:37:07anitagraser:I'm excited to see the election results :)
14:41:28jef:would it be possible to see the votes per nominee over time?
14:43:29vcraciunescu:yes, that was I was mentioning in my summary report
14:43:41vcraciunescu:what about “Motion to accept the CRO report and to declare the 2017 Board member elections valid”?
14:43:49jgarnett:so if I can speculate
14:44:47jgarnett:I am trying to understand what insite that would provided.I would assume Jeff, who handled himself very well as a candidate, would be successful during these elections.
14:45:13jgarnett:but due to withdrawing would not be avaialble to serve as a board member.
14:45:19anitagraser:sounds good to me vcraciunescu
14:45:34jgarnett:But the idea would be to see if his withdrawing changed any percentages
14:45:52jgarnett:yeah this is awkward anyway it is done
14:46:13jef:vcraciunescu: ah ok, sorry. thank
14:46:15anitagraser:maybe better not to dwell on speculations
14:46:35vcraciunescu:I will publish a CSV file. every row will have a time stamp and the way that member voted
14:46:38jgarnett:alsmost done hunting down response from each baord member via email
14:46:57kalxas_:there is one posibility we might have a problem
14:47:14jgarnett:vcraciunescu: as a tech focused group we will enjoy that; but I am trying to figure out a way to heal and bring together
14:47:17anitagraser:vcraciunescu: I don't think the motion has to be any more complex than what you suggested
14:47:55jgarnett:(I am dissapointed as I thought this round of elections was being successful in that for a bit)
14:48:05vcraciunescu:of course, members will have no name but numbers (no one knows how individual members voted because this in an anonymous process)
14:49:09vcraciunescu:jgarnett: do you have better ideas on how to publish that? I would not like to touch the raw file which can be exported by LimeSurvey
14:49:43anitagraser:jgarnett: I think members appreciated the great range of candidates, but if the last few years have taught me anything, you'll never make everyone on discuss happy
14:50:04vcraciunescu:anitagraser: I totally agree
14:51:01jgarnett:I cannot find a clear email from Angelos Tzotsos
14:51:12jgarnett:what I hve found from everyone else is now on loomio
14:51:47vcraciunescu:jgarnett: one more mistake to report
14:51:59jgarnett:agreed, but a bit discouraged. I woudl settle for "fair" if not "happy".
14:52:00vcraciunescu:maria brovelli did not sent feedback yet
14:52:11vcraciunescu:whose words are from the other maria :)
14:52:12jgarnett:(the candidate debates on foss4g affordability accomplished that if nothing else)
14:52:50jgarnett:oh shucks, thanks!
14:53:14* anitagraser hasn't had the time to read the foss4g thread yet
14:53:16vcraciunescu:but the real maria director just reacted :)
14:53:19vcraciunescu:that’s good
14:53:39msmitherdc[m]:sorry i'm late
14:53:40kalxas_:I have not yet sent a response
14:53:45jgarnett:updated the page, I will go look for other email
14:54:32jgarnett:still does this mean we have quorum ?
14:54:34kalxas_:the reason is: I am thinking about a potential deadlock situation for the board
14:54:47msmitherdc[m]:i would say that the election is good, imho
14:55:00vcraciunescu:yes, we do have!
14:55:16kalxas_:roll call?
14:55:25kalxas_:Angelos here
14:55:26vcraciunescu:vcraciunescu: here
14:55:30jgarnett:Jody Garnett here
14:56:03msmitherdc[m]:Mike here
14:56:19vcraciunescu:anitagraser: ?
14:56:29anitagraser:Anita here
14:56:40kalxas_:5 out of 9, we have quorum
14:56:46jgarnett:(whew)
14:56:56jgarnett:vcraciunescu: can we ask you to chair this meeting?
14:57:01jgarnett:I am happy to scribe
14:57:04vcraciunescu:sure
14:57:37jgarnett:We have the following agenda from email:
14:57:38jgarnett:1. Review and discussion of CROs report
14:57:38jgarnett:2. Accept election results
14:57:51jgarnett:as chair you may just wish to focus on 2 above.
14:57:58vcraciunescu:the purpuse of this meeting is the CRO report and to decide on how to go forward with the elections
14:58:27vcraciunescu:jgarnett: what we should accept is the fact that the election is valid
14:58:53vcraciunescu:the results are the community votes and this cannot be accepted by the board or someone else :)
14:59:16jgarnett:yes just so
14:59:48anitagraser:if you don't mind ... MOT1: Motion to accept the CRO report and to declare the 2017 Board member elections valid
14:59:51jgarnett:We have seen a couple email discussions, involving most of the board members.
15:00:14jgarnett:I would like to here from kalxas_ - who I think is the only board member we have not heard from?
15:00:19kalxas_:I would like to discuss something since I did not manage to send it on the thread
15:00:51vcraciunescu:kalxas_: shout
15:00:53kalxas_:I agree that the election process was handled excellent by our CRO
15:01:14kalxas_:and I would like to thank you Vasile for your efforts
15:01:43kalxas_:having said this, I see one potential issue
15:03:09kalxas_:we might end up in a situation where one of the candidates resigned during the election process, resigned and the resignation was not accepted. This candidate might get elected and we never hear back from him.
15:03:24kalxas_:so we might end up with an elected board member not responding
15:04:03vcraciunescu:hm… if elected, I think Jeff will speak up… anyway, you have a point
15:04:09anitagraser:kalxas_: good point for future policy discussion. luckily, we only need to discuss this election now
15:04:10kalxas_:what happens then? what if the member does not communicate ?
15:04:41kalxas_:Jeff has deleted himself from discuss
15:04:45jgarnett:I am under the impression that Jeff has communicated his wishes clearly, and the CRO has accepted this withdrawl.
15:04:51kalxas_:and has not responded to any e-mail
15:05:17vcraciunescu:kalxas_: true, no other message was sent to CRO email or on my private email
15:05:41msmitherdc[m]:what more could Jeff say at this point?
15:05:46jgarnett:Much like sanghee's comments I would like our organization to always respect volunteer / contirbutor capacity.
15:05:49vcraciunescu:anyway, it’s hard from me to think that jeff will not have a clear position on this
15:05:49kalxas_:we might find ourselves in the awkward position to make a motion to kick someone off the board?
15:06:11jgarnett:So although Jeff's name remains on the ballet, too late to change, we should respect his decision.
15:06:41kalxas_:in my opinion we need legal advise on this matter
15:06:46anitagraser:jgarnett: +1 to accept that Jeff will not be on the next board
15:06:47kalxas_:and we have a lawyer
15:06:59vcraciunescu:kalxas_: we can ask all the new members to confirm that they accept the position and that are ready to serve in the board… for sure not something in our bylawas
15:07:05kalxas_:we should be asking for legal advise based on Delaware law
15:07:18msmitherdc[m]:i don't think we need any legal advice
15:07:25vcraciunescu:kalxas_: I agree but is quite complicated
15:07:43msmitherdc[m]:this is just a volunteer position. Anyone can withdraw at any time for any reason
15:08:09kalxas_:msmitherdc[m], I am not questioning that, but this decision has legal impact
15:08:09anitagraser:I'm not sure why legal advice is necessary at this point
15:08:18jgarnett:(This is a general pattern for our community, I occasionally over extend and have to appologize for not meeting expectations - and in general our community is forgiving and understanding on this matter)
15:08:45jgarnett:taking too long to type, discussion has moved on.
15:08:45msmitherdc[m]:legal impact? i don't see how, frankly
15:09:03vcraciunescu:if elected, CRO can officialy ask to jeff to clarify his position in a given time…
15:09:08sanghee:Sorry. I thought we would make it tomorrow.
15:09:21vcraciunescu:hi sanghee!
15:09:25sanghee:Hi all
15:09:30anitagraser:hi sanghee
15:09:39jgarnett:kalxas_: I do not think that legal advice is necessary, we have a precedent in our organization of asking a candidate to serve a partial term in the event an elected director is unable ot meet their commitment.
15:09:42kalxas_:vcraciunescu, as you said, this is not in our bylaws, actually none of the situations at hand are in the bylaws
15:10:00kalxas_:*are not
15:10:20jgarnett:if we really wanted to we could hold an initial board meeting with fewer members, and make asking a candidate to serve the first motion.
15:10:34jgarnett:but I think it would be a fair bit of process for no net benifit, and some confusion.
15:11:19jgarnett:vcraciunescu: If that process would make you feel more comfortable we could make it a second motion, or more realistically ask the first board meeting to handle it.
15:12:09jgarnett:ie make a motion now to accept the election as conducted fairly, anounce the results, and deal with jeff's withdrawl (if elected) in the first board meeting.
15:12:15vcraciunescu:i think we should just deal with our first motion in this meeting
15:12:32vcraciunescu:jgarnett: +1
15:12:35jgarnett:kalxas_: would this address your concern?
15:12:44kalxas_:MOT1: +1
15:12:51vcraciunescu:MOT1: 0
15:13:12sanghee:Is the MOT1 "accept the election as conducted fairly"?
15:13:23kalxas_:jgarnett, yes
15:13:25sanghee:If then MOT1: +1
15:13:26vcraciunescu:sanghee: MOT1: Motion to accept the CRO report and to declare the 2017 Board member elections valid
15:13:39sanghee:MOT1: +1
15:13:39msmitherdc[m]:MOT1: +1
15:13:45jgarnett:MOT1: +1
15:13:46anitagraser:MOT1: +1
15:14:33kalxas_:so we will confirm on loomio
15:14:48vcraciunescu:thank you all for trust and support!
15:15:09anitagraser:thanks for taking care of this!
15:15:18msmitherdc[m]:you handled it better than i could vcraciunescu
15:15:26kalxas_:vcraciunescu, my concerns above have nothing to do with your handling the process of course
15:15:31sanghee:Thx Vasile!
15:16:13kalxas_:you had to deal with exceptions
15:16:25vcraciunescu:it was my pleasure. I will create the result wiki page ASAP
15:16:55jgarnett:A point of order as scribe, in the intersts of time I am recording the voting results from IRC (where quorum was established) on Loomio.
15:17:03jgarnett:so that we can go ahead with anouncing election results.
15:17:16vcraciunescu:I think so, jgarnett
15:17:39jgarnett:So we will consider the motion carried above; if the chair could recognize that with a "MOT 1 passed" or similar.
15:18:09vcraciunescu:I think so
15:18:11jgarnett:(I know we like our electric voting, but the 100% response rate required would put an uncessary delay in the mix)
15:18:36vcraciunescu:yes
15:18:47jgarnett:vcraciunescu: can I get a clear motion passed from you as chair?
15:18:57vcraciunescu:sure
15:19:11vcraciunescu:I declare MOT1 accepted
15:19:11jgarnett:(go on, these IRC logs are recording :D )
15:19:52jgarnett:okay loomio updated here https://www.loomio.org/d/PauIx2jl
15:19:53sigq:Title: Loomio (at www.loomio.org)
15:20:00kalxas_:jgarnett, having a 100% response,especially in this matter in not unnecessary in my opinion
15:20:22jgarnett:agreed, it would be nice, it is just if we do the electronic voting our bylaws require a 100% response.
15:20:47jgarnett:vcraciunescu: is there anything else you would like out of this meeting (it has gone a bit over time due to late start)
15:21:13vcraciunescu:no. just to thank you all and to apologize that was in such a short notice
15:21:45jgarnett:in that case - motion to adjourn
15:21:55kalxas_:thanks vcraciunescu for all your hard work!
15:22:07vcraciunescu:it was a good experience and I’m sure we can improve a lot of this aspects for the future
15:23:04jgarnett:agreed
15:23:18msmitherdc[m]:thanks all
15:23:52vcraciunescu:a nice day to all of you!
15:24:02anitagraser:have a nice day, bye
15:25:07jgarnett:meeting results sent to board list
15:25:34jgarnett:vcraciunescu: I believe you are now set to anoucne election results according to your set schedule, thanks again for you hard work.
15:30:33vcraciunescu:yes, the result will be announced as schedule
15:31:10vcraciunescu:I hope by laptop battery will agree too :)
15:31:32vcraciunescu:still at that conference