On 03/28/2015 03:37 PM, Kyle MacDonald wrote:
> Tristan I absolutely agree that foundation management (inclusive of
> the board and the foundation management team) through community
> feedback is essential.
>
> In addition may I suggest, where legal and appropriate, that the
> board publish performance reviews / goals for key leadership within
> the foundation. I would like to see clear conflict of interest
> disclosures from all leadership within the foundation (both
> current/static as well as potential). This is a problem that needs to
> be addressed as well.
>
> It's great companies and individuals can contribute but if you aren't
> on the good side of the foundation management you can be easily left
> out or marginalized as they support projects/activities/press that
> are more "prominent" in their minds counteracting reasons to be
> supportive. This is now a huge challenge to anyone in our global
> ecosystem.
I would hope that it's no surprise that I am a huge advocate of open and
transparent dealings, so in general, I am a favor of both collecting
feedback and publishing all of the things we can publish.
However, that sounds like an accusation of misconduct in the guise of
suggesting a process or policy be adopted. I can tell you from
experience that the answer to such issues is not to invent process or
policy, but rather to confront them in an open and honest manner.
I would also add that one of the reasons we have a foundation staff is
so that there can be people who CAN make value judgments on a day to day
basis as to where to orient the foundations efforts. This necessarily
means that there will be people "left out" from time to time - otherwise
it would be complete chaos. I have never personally experienced this
being due to someone "not being on the good side" of a staff member.
If there is a way in which anyone else believes they have been on the
receiving side of systemic corruption, I would urge that person to raise
it with one or more of their board members if it seems that raising
concerns with foundation staff is going nowhere.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Mar 28, 2015, at 7:52 AM, Chris C. Kemp
>> <chris.c.kemp@nebula.com> wrote:
>>
>> Tristan -
>>
>> I think that increasing the scope of the questions covered and
>> generally soliciting more feedback from stakeholders would be
>> helpful. I'm supportive of both the discussion, and the ideas you
>> propose below.
>>
>> Best, Chris
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Tristan Goode
>> [mailto:tristan@aptira.com] Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 6:50 PM
>> To: foundation-board@lists.openstack.org;
>> Foundation@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [Foundation Board]
>> April 2 OpenStack Board meeting call for agenda items; Board packet
>> materials due by Monday March 30th.
>>
>> (Putting this out to the Foundation list also for wider input)
>>
>> Can I please propose a quick board discussion around improving the
>> feedback to the organisation, perhaps very easily by adding some
>> feedback questions to the user survey? Presently there is only one
>> non-technical question in the survey about what folks hope to see
>> as priorities or something like that. I'd be hoping to see
>> questions like...
>>
>> 1: The goals for the OpenStack board in 2014 were X, Y and Z. On a
>> scale of 1 to 10 where 1 is least satisfied and 10 is most
>> satisfied, how satisfied were you that the board met goal X in
>> 2014? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2: How satisfied were you that
>> the board met goal Y in 2014? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 3: How
>> satisfied were you that the board met goal Z in 2014? 1 2 3 4
>> 5 6 7 8 9 10
>>
>> ...and so on for TC performance, interactions with Foundation
>> staff, and so on.
>>
>> From what I can tell, we have a way to go to improving feedback to
>> the Foundation on governance, organisation and overall management
>> presently and this is a pretty standard mechanism used by
>> organisations worldwide.
>>
>> I'd welcome feedback from anyone in this area. It may be that the
>> user survey isn't the best place to add this, but I feel like there
>> is definitely room for discussion here.
>>
>> Cheers Tristan
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Alan Clark
>> [mailto:aclark@suse.com] Sent: Thursday, 26 March 2015 9:53 AM To:
>> foundation-board@lists.openstack.org Subject: [Foundation Board]
>> April 2 OpenStack Board meeting call for agenda items; Board packet
>> materials due by Monday March 30th.
>>
>> The next OpenStack board meeting will be held on April 2nd at
>> 12noon - 2pm pacific.
>>
>> Committee Chairs and Directors please send me items you would like
>> on the agenda. I need the materials for the board packet by EOB
>> Monday March 30th so that I may post and distribute the materials
>> to the board prior to the meeting. (Please tell me if materials
>> need to be marked confidential.)
>>
>> I've started drafting the agenda[1]. Expecting topics from several
>> committees, it's going to be a very full agenda. We will also be
>> holding an Executive Session during the meeting.
>>
>> Thanks, AlanClark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [1]
>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/2Apr2015BoardMeeting
>>
>>
#Agenda
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Foundation-board
>> mailing list Foundation-board@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
>>
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
>> Foundation-board mailing list Foundation-board@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
>>
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list Foundation@lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
> _______________________________________________ Foundation mailing
> list Foundation@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>