1,285
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 24:
Line 24: + + + + + +
no edit summary
There is also an obvious, huge, conflict of interest in having so many of the proposed badge recipients voting on the issue. Doing something like this will take away all credibility of SugarLabs as an NGO or even as a viable organization that relies heavily on volunteer contributions to their efforts.
There is also an obvious, huge, conflict of interest in having so many of the proposed badge recipients voting on the issue. Doing something like this will take away all credibility of SugarLabs as an NGO or even as a viable organization that relies heavily on volunteer contributions to their efforts.
:Yes, there is a potential conflict of interest, but that would be handled by a board in the usual fashion, those with a conflict recuse temporarily for duration of a decision, with full knowledge of the chair, and minuted. Boards can remunerate themselves, think of directors' fees, but they must do it at arms-length, so when one of the board members is to be remunerated for work done outside the board or for the board they must recuse themselves from the decision. How to handle conflict of interest in the board can include mentioning these strategies and procedures in a proposal, so Caryl's point that the proposal doesn't specifically address this; is valid. --[[User:Quozl|Quozl]] ([[User talk:Quozl|talk]]) 17:59, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
= Process for inclusion and exclusion by nominated contributors =
Not all contributors can or will edit the Wiki, so it would be more appropriate for the board to contact the contributors formally by e-mail to ask if they wish to be included or excluded from receiving the stipend, and require a response either way. Any board members who become nominated contributors should not be asked this during the board meeting; contributors should be treated equally. --[[User:Quozl|Quozl]] ([[User talk:Quozl|talk]]) 17:59, 7 April 2017 (EDT)