[OOTB-hive] [GOV] Draft by-laws

[Richard Esplin]

I have decided that I do not have a strong opinion about membership standards. 
I think both approaches could work fine.

I discussed voting criteria a bit with Jeff, and wanted to share my reasoning 
with the list.

Jeff pointed out that the current by-laws only discuss voting for the Board, 
and voting within a committee. I think we need to define the concept of a 
general vote.

The Board will be making most decisions without needing a vote. Committees 
will be making most decisions without needing a vote, and when they do vote, 
it would likely be in the context of their specific committee. But some 
decisions by the Board or by a Committee should be ratified by a vote of the 
general membership. And some disagreements will only be resolvable by a vote 
of the general membership. I expect these to be rare, but important. These are 
the types of votes where the Order needs to be independent of Alfresco 
corporate.

An example would be how we change the by-laws.

I think it makes sense for Alfresco employees to be excluded from these types 
of votes (though they can participate in the discussion).

However, I think it is important that all members of a committee participate 
equally in the voting within the committee. In Jeff's draft of the by-laws, he 
offers two examples to explain when voting is needed within a committee. Your 
second example about eliminating a section of the web site illustrates my 
concern about excluding Alfresco employees who are contributing on a 
committee. If I am on the web committee and trying to help maintain a section 
of the site, and there is a discussion about my section, I would feel very bad 
to be excluded from the vote that determines the future of that effort. Instead 
of potentially facing that scenario, it would be easier to not participate in 
the first place.

This problem is the worst on the smaller committees where we already struggle 
to find contributors and most need employees to assist.

I don't see how voting specific to a committee would compromise the 
independence of the Order, especially if there was a process for a 
questionable committee decision to be brought to a vote of the general 
membership where Alfresco employees would not have a vote.

I think this is an interesting conversation, and I have enjoyed seeing the 
various opinions about the goals and future of the Order. I'm glad we are 
being patient as we seek consensus.

Richard

-- 
Richard Esplin
Head of Community
Tel: +1 801 855 0866
Mobile: +1 801 735 4220
Skype: esplinr

Alfresco
Simple + Smart

alfresco.com | twitter.com/alfresco | facebook.com/alfrescosoftware | 
blogs.alfresco.com | linkedin.com/company/alfresco | youtube.com/alfresco101

Join us at Alfresco Summit | San Francisco, Sep 23-25 | London, Oct 7-9 | 
http://summit.alfresco.com


On Thursday, September 04, 2014 22:24:26 Boriss Mejias wrote:
> Hi bees,
> 
> We had a very nice and constructive discussion today in the channel, and
> Ole made a good summary of it. Here are my two cents about membership and
> voting:
> 
> 1. Membership: I like the idea that we are going to accept membership of
> everyone who is willing to contribute. I don't see the Order of the Bee as
> the Hall of Fame of Community members that has already contributed, but I
> see it as the best place to make a contribution to the Alfresco community.
> That implies that we need to reward members who contribute more that
> others. One way is the voting mechanism.
> 
> 2. Voting: If we allow the voting of Alfresco employees with a limited % of
> participation, we raise another issue. Let's say we limit their
> participation to 33%, and there are x Alfresco employees being members of
> the order. Let's say that those x members represent more than 33%. How are
> we going to decide which Alfresco employee can vote, and which one cannot?
> Maybe they will have to organize themselves to decide who uses the
> available "seats". If they do that, the members holding a seat will be the
> "representatives" of the Alfresco employees in the order, and in a way,
> representatives of Alfresco Inc. And there it goes our statement of
> independent organization.
> 
> Something else, the amount of voting members will vary over time, meaning
> that we will need to ask the Alfresco employees to select new
> representatives, or drop some. I think it complicates the overall thing.
> Hence, we need to decide whether every Alfresco employee can vote or not.
> In such case, I prefer that they can't vote to avoid problems, and also to
> protect them from the opinion Alfresco Inc can have on them: "Oh, so you
> voted on something for the order that is actually bad for the company!"
> 
> Regarding voting within a committee, it's also complicated, because the
> work on the committees is crucial for the overall result of the order.
> Also, everyone can participate in the discussions and proposals for
> solutions. Voting is only we can't get an agreement. I would say that
> Alfresco employees are free from any responsibility of voting, to guarantee
> the independence of the order, and to prevent them from having issues with
> Alfresco Inc.
> 
> 3. How do we reward Alfresco employees if they can't vote. We need to have
> a sort of public acknowledgement of contributors, independent of the voting
> system. Being publicly acknowledge will probably work better as a motivator
> than getting voting rights/responsibilities.
> 
> That's my opinion
> cheers
> Boriss
> aka Bee Mejias
<snip>