Cjl: moved Talk:Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 to Talk:Oversight Board/2009/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16

2011-03-02T03:44:02Z

moved Talk:Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 to Talk:Oversight Board/2009/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16

← Older revision	Revision as of 23:44, 1 March 2011
(No difference)

Cjl: moved Talk:Walter is a wanker 13/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 to Talk:Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 over redirect: revert

2010-02-25T00:01:19Z

moved Talk:Walter is a wanker 13/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 to Talk:Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 over redirect: revert

← Older revision	Revision as of 20:01, 24 February 2010
(No difference)

Faggot: moved Talk:Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 to Talk:Walter is a wanker 13/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16: Walter is a wanker

2010-02-24T23:52:48Z

moved Talk:Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 to Talk:Walter is a wanker 13/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16: Walter is a wanker

← Older revision	Revision as of 19:52, 24 February 2010
(No difference)

Danceswithcars: Some comments on first reading notes/ minutes of meeting

2009-10-18T16:16:59Z

Some comments on first reading notes/ minutes of meeting

New page

== DWC Comments on Minutes ==

From other non profit board experience, some things seemed a little odd,
and while I can't say they are wrong, as a newbie, and very unfamiliar
with SugarLab and OLPC organizational structures and history in general,
I will point them out for the Board and others to consider:

Reading the log transcript cold (without much other experience):

1) Agendas are usually set ahead of time.
Chair of a meeting (usually not the Exec Director,
if a paid by the Board position
(and I understand all contributors are volunteer),
but the board Chair, vice chair, etc and secretary
in consultation with the Board and membership itself)

Maybe I missed it.

Several things came up

2) "<walterbender> we are a somewhat Boston-centric group at the moment. "

This may be an issue going forward, IMO. Clearly SugarLabs starts as a
spinoff of OLPC, and OLPC is Boston/ Cambridge, Mass, USA centric,
but not clear to me which of the principles / governance/ etc
of OLPC are inherited into SL, and which are not.

Free and Open Source for example, (and I'm not saying this is something
I necessarily want), but if someone wants Sugar on Windows
for example, or Sugar on Mac, would the principle from OLPC
be inherited in SL? Windows is closed source, Linux is not.
Mac / Darwin is somewhere in between as a cousin of Linux in the BSD
side of the family tree. Tools and Application layers are more common
with GNU toolchain/utils, but diverge in Windowing (Aqua/ Carbon/ etc)
vs X Window and substrate GTK, adding Gnome on OLPC XO 1.5, etc.

And that is just some of the technical comparisons,
organization structures of paid staff and management in Apple
and Microsoft, plus hierarchies vary widely from an open source
community based approach.

3) As a corollary to 2 above:

SLOB Liason to Labs, assuming Washington DC is one of the labs,
(not sure which others there are)

Who would the representative(s) be?
How is that determined?
Local votes?
or from above, so to speak, SLOBs / Board decides who represents?

4) http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2009-September/008634.html
email thread, which I was very vocal about not being included upon,
as a latecomer.

If membership is frozen for the next year, and election terms
are 2 years or so (and Christof points out the timeline),
then when does the community really get heard?

Several members state "community members" affilation,
and OLPC staff is on board, Red Hat is mentioned,
but what about people further out?
In other countries?
With other orientations/ perspectives?
Teachers?
Students?
Grandparents/ PTA, School Administrators, Politicians, Honorary, Etc?

The life cycle of software can be much quicker than hardware,
new releases and some new things coming out much quicker
than hardware, so most decisions could be made by most of the current
board members with little to no direct input from the million
or so current OLPC XO 1.0 users if SL development goes towards
Sugar On A Stick (tm) or some other development direction.

With OLPC controlling how the hardware is even available,
but Sugar running on other more commodity based hardware,
I'm wondering if this is a fault line, for lack of a better term,
with the continential plates moving different directions..

5) I'd like to reiterate, I like some of what SL is doing,
but have a firm belief, perhaps rooted in more "leaders are
but trusted servants, we do not govern" that it isn't much
behind closed doors (except Executive Session and things like
personnel decisions based on community feedback)

These are comments upon a first reading, and may change over time.
Luckily, this is a wiki ;-/

If this is the wrong place to discuss things, please let me know,
seems like the discussion page of the main article would be right,
but maybe on my personal page? Linked to here or vice versa?

Making governance, policy and procedures easy to understand
for people with a little non profit board experience
(admittedly while many of these things are being decided
for the first time as a 1-2 year old Non Profit)
will also make it easier for kids and the users
of the software/ Activities to be active participants
in the process as well as the code, admittedly democracy biased,
but also what I hope open source is all about...

[[User:Danceswithcars|Danceswithcars]] 16:16, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Oversight Board/2009/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 - Revision history

Cjl: moved Talk:Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 to Talk:Oversight Board/2009/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16

Cjl: moved Talk:Walter is a wanker 13/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 to Talk:Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 over redirect: revert

Faggot: moved Talk:Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16 to Talk:Walter is a wanker 13/Meeting Minutes-2009-10-16: Walter is a wanker

Danceswithcars: Some comments on first reading notes/ minutes of meeting