[Foundation] UPDATE from Board Meeting

Russell Davis rkdavis at burninghorse.com
Thu Jul 31 16:14:09 CDT 2003

they are not unfounded they might be stretching the point a little but
they are definatly not unfounded. YES the by-laws allow the board to do
more or less what they want and that is good however the board and the
JSF in general has a terrible record at scheduling things and creating
rulesand then rescheduling or changing the rules at the last possible
moment this is not good and borders on inethical behaviour. I have
spoken about this at length on many occasions and IMHO it is not
acceptable, yes there is legally nothing wrong with it but it is not

it is unethical at the very minimum as it allows those who did not send
in their position papers to examine the papers of those that followed
the initial timetable and tailor their papers accordingly. Yes they
should not have access to them, but we all know things leak especially
within the JSF. If you have only recieved 2 position papers so far well
such is life and it is not close of business yet i am sure alot of
people were going to wait until the last possible moment.

As for timetable for when the board meets or doesn't I really don't care
if it is every six weeks or every six days but whatever it is you stick
to it within reason. the rescheduling of a day or two is reasonable but
9 days is not. I couldn't give two hoots as to why it was rescheduled
one of the responsibilities of board membership is to make yourself
available when meetings are scheduled and if you can't make it then the
rest continue without your input

again I will say that without seeing the proposal I can't comment on it
and I am sure that if nothing else it will be interesting but there was
a much fairer way of handling this without resorting to the cakhanded
reschuling that seems to be a JSF signature increasing the discussion
time to fill in the gap would have been preferable and would not have
stunk of business as usual backroom politics.

bst rgrds

On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 15:29, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Russell:
> The Board has been meeting about every six weeks, and that has proved to
> be a productive schedule. A meeting was scheduled for July 22 but was 
> postponed because of scheduling conflicts and the desire to wait for 
> results of the name change vote before discussing the important matters 
> that are before the community at this time.
> One of those who proposed the name change asked me to request a delay in
> the Board and Council position paper deadline so that people who backed
> that proposal could sort out their next move and whether they wanted to
> apply for Board and/or Council. In addition, the resolution that the
> Board approved has some impact on our direction as an organization, and
> the Board felt that it would be appropriate for the candidates to take
> that resolution into account in their position papers. Combine that with 
> the fact I've received only two Board position papers (when the Board has
> five members), and a postponement seemed eminently appropriate. Finally,
> Section 3.2 of the JSF Bylaws reserves to the Board the right to name
> the time of the Annual Meeting. The three-week delay is not unreasonable
> given the major decisions facing the organization.
> Your allegations of ethical misconduct are unfounded.
> Peter
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 02:49:07PM -0400, Russell Davis wrote:
> > Before seeing the resolution I can make no comment about it however I
> > find the fact that the board was meeting on the day when position papers
> > are due for their replacements and making decisions that have resulted
> > in delaying the timetable extremely concerning. While there is nothing
> > legally wrong in them doing this, tact and ethics should have resulted
> > in them either having their meeting a day or more earlier or waiting
> > until after the AGM. I feel this is extremely "unfair" to those who have
> > worked hard to work within the initial timeframe to get their papers in
> > on time.
> > 
> > If they could not have had their meeting earlier or later then the
> > ethical course of action should have been:-
> > 
> > 1. papers still due at close of business today
> > 
> > 2. the discussion phase extended to cover the gap
> > between the papers due date and the new proxy voting date
> > created by delaying the AGM
> > 
> > 3. proceed as normal taking into account the delay
> > 
> > bst rgrds
> > Russell
> > 
> > On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 13:53, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > > Today's meeting of the JSF Board of Directors just ended. As we all
> > > know, this has been a time of ferment within the Jabber community, and
> > > specifically within the JSF itself. The Board has passed an important
> > > resolution that I think addresses most of the concerns raised by those
> > > who recently proposed changing the name of the JSF. Because I must craft 
> > > the specific text of that resolution and receive approval from the Board 
> > > regarding that wording, I will not announce that resolution until later 
> > > today or possibly tomorrow. However, given the current circumstances and
> > > the need to reach broad agreement regarding the resolution approved
> > > today before moving forward, the Board has decided to postpone the annual 
> > > meeting of the JSF by three weeks, from August 27 to September 17. This 
> > > will result in changes to the schedule for Board and Council elections as 
> > > well. Specifically, the elections schedule is now as follows:
> > > 
> > > 1. August 21:  Board and Council position papers due
> > > 
> > > 2. August 22 - September 2: Discussion / Questions
> > > 
> > > 3. September 3 - 17: Proxy Voting
> > > 
> > > 4. September 17 @ 17:00 UTC: Annual Meeting
> > > 
> > > Please see my earlier announcement for more detailed information about 
> > > the elections process:
> > > 
> > >    http://mailman.jabber.org/pipermail/members/2003-July/002493.html
> > > 
> > > Thank you.
> > > 
> > > Peter
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members

More information about the Members mailing list