Open Stack

> Their purpose is exactly to give a voice to members of the community who
> would otherwise be excluded because of the cost of the corporate
> seats.

I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding.  

The definition of "individual members" (and their associated seats on the board), has been on the wiki since early this year and it is clearly described there, as well as in the by laws, as being inclusive of people who are paid to work on it (such as by member companies). 

The wiki:

"Individual Members

"Individual Members" who participate on their own or as part of their paid employment. It is free to join as an Individual Member and Individual Members have the right to run for, and vote for, a number of leadership positions. Characteristics of Individual Members:

Contribute to OpenStack in a variety of ways such as code, documentation, translations, bug reports, testing, project infrastructure, advocacy, marketing, community management, legal guidance

Expected to be constructive & courteous, adhering to a community code of conduct

Wear the OpenStack hat and always act with integrity

Elect representatives to Board, Technical Committee and PTL positions (if they are also project contributors)"


and in the by laws it's even more explicit:

"2.2 Individual Members.  

(a) Individual Members must be natural persons. Individual Members may be any natural person who has an interest in the purpose of the Foundation and may be employed by Platinum Members or Gold Members. "

With respect to the risk of one company dominating the board, that was raised during the process, and the conclusion reached was to add a 2 seat limit per affiliation out of the 24 total seats.  

I can appreciate the fact that someone coming into the discussion now may look at past decisions and disagree (especially without all of the context), but this approach has been discussed and iterated openly for several months and is reflected in the published by laws. If there is sufficient demand to amend the by laws, there is a process for that (in the by laws, naturally!).

Personally I feel very good about the list of nominees we have today, and know many of them well enough to know they will do a great job on the Board of Directors, regardless of their affiliation with member companies.  

Mark
@sparkycollier
512-791-0356




On Wednesday, August 1, 2012 8:55pm, "Benjamin Black" <b at b3k.us> said:

> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/01/2012 07:03 PM, George Reese wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 1, 2012, at 6:45 PM, Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com
>>> <mailto:mordred at inaugust.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nope. Still don't stipulate this point. If a vote came up to the board
>>>> that would cost HP a billion dollars but that made sense for OpenStack
>>>> and is something I would vote for it I worked elsewhere,  I would still
>>>> vote for it without blinking an eye.
>>>>
>>>> I will stipulate that in general, it is possible that employers do exert
>>>> influence over employees, and that policy might need to take that in to
>>>> account. I will not stipulate that employers always influence employees.
>>>
>>> I did not say they always influence employees.
>>>
>>> I said they can (and sometimes will) influence employees. Shouldn't we
>>> have a few board positions that are free of that possibility of influence?
>>
>> You know - I'd support the existence of a number of seats that are for
>> that purpose - as long as it isn't ALL of the at-large seats.
>>
> 
> They are not at-large seats, they are individual member seats.  Their
> purpose is exactly to give a voice to members of the community who
> would otherwise be excluded because of the cost of the corporate
> seats.  I want those seats used for their intended purpose.  While
> eliminating the possibility of undue influence by a corporate member
> is clearly out of the question, taking reasonable steps to reduce
> opportunities for it and increase opportunities for wider community
> participation is worthwhile.  Excluding corporate member employees
> from the individual member seats is such a reasonable step.
> 
> 
> b
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>