[Foundation] Reset: Back to business

Andre Durand (durand.com) andre at durand.com
Thu Mar 14 09:48:48 CST 2002


The board does have a legal obligation to meet regularly. Outside of the
legal obligation, in which, corporate matters are discussed, we are
there to support the general well-being of JSF, and help it function
smoothly and progress. 

The 'day-to-day' operations are and should be managed by the executive
director, the counsel and the membership. 

When things arise that appear to have elevated themselves to a 'board
level decision', it would be helpful if we had an understanding of where
the membership and counsel stood on the issue, so that we can help make
decisions that do in fact reflect the direction the membership would
like to take things. I for one will be meeting with Peter Saint-Andre on
a regular basis, to discuss what issues he believes are things for me
and the other board members to resolve. 

Outside of that, the board is not there to dictate direction, although
there might be times when for one reason or another, one of us has a
particularly well-formed opinion that they wish to project and see
action on. 

I for one am here to do nothing but assist JSF. While I have the normal
emotional ties to Jabber, Inc., I am not an employee of Jabber, Inc.,
and my real interest lies only in facilitating an acceleration of
independent goals that I know can co-exist in between the two like any
good partnership.  

If there are things that any of you believe is an issue that requires
board intervention or assistance, Jeremie, myself and the other two
board members are only an email away, and we all welcome the opportunity
to serve the membership. 

Andre Durand

-----Original Message-----
From: Iain Shigeoka [mailto:iainshigeoka at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 4:28 PM
To: members at jabber.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation] Reset: Back to business


On 3/13/02 11:40 AM, "Jeremie" <jeremie at jabber.org> wrote:

>> I strongly disagree.  As I understood it, the entire point of the JSF

>> and council was that they would handle a lot of the administrative 
>> and legal BS so that the Jabber could concentrate on the business and

>> technical aspects of evolving Jabber.
> 
> You're mixing and confusing too many things here.  The point of the 
> _Board_ is to handle administrative and legal BS.  The _Council_ was 
> only to approve JEPs/JIGs.

Yes. Sorry. For convenience I grouped them together.  They are separate.

>> It has been the responsibility of the JSF (Board and Council) for at 
>> least the past 6 months if not longer, to handle the administrative 
>> and legal issues for expediting matters so that we could move 
>> forward.  The board and council have done nothing in this direction.
> 
> Again, please don't mix Board and Council together, they are completly

> different things for different purposes.
> 
> The Council has done everything it was given to do, the full archives 
> are publically available http://mailman.jabber.org/pipermail/council/ 
> for review, and in light of recent discussion/confusion on it's role, 
> it will be meeting this week to better define and guide that role of 
> approving JEPs.

I was under the impression that the council should have a leadership
role in the JEP process.  Perhaps give guidance and advice on what
standards should be pushed forward, what is more important, and provide
an overall vision of where we're going as a whole.  From this recent
conversation though, it definitely seems this is not the case.  I shall
adjust my mental model accordingly.

> It is due time that the Board have another meeting though, and 
> depending on the outcome of my last message w.r.t. the trademark, 
> there may even be some decisions to discuss.  As of yet, I haven't 
> seen anyone directly ask the Board to make a decision on any 
> administrative/legal issue.

I'm very unclear on how this works then.  We as members must explicitly
ask the Board to decide on an issue.  If we do not, the board does
nothing?  Do we as individual members, create a proposal then submit it
or do we have to take a vote and submit it as a group to the board or is
it less formal or more formal?

Let's take this trademark issue as an example.  Way back when, we
discussed it to death.  We talked about JabberPowered.  We discussed
changing the name to XMPP so that we would not deal with it.  Someone
said someone was looking into it (was that Jabber Inc or JSF?).  This
did not work out the way it was supposed to (I'm assuming at least).

So let's learn from it.

1) we (at least some number of members) have already recognized there is
a "trademark issue" surrounding "Jabber" and "JabberPowered" and any
sort of compliance claim for products, services, etc.  Even if there is
no legal issue, there is a communication and confusion problem
surrounding it.

What do we do next?

1) Does one of us write a proposal and submit it to the board?
2) do we have to vote on it before submitting it?
3) Can we just send an impromptu email to someone on the board, "hey,
this trademark issue needs to be fixed" and the board magically takes
care of it?
4) once the board has the item for decision making, can we follow up on
the issue, expedite it, affect the board's decision, etc?

-iain


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________
Members mailing list
Members at jabber.org
http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members



More information about the Members mailing list