Hello Florian, all,
Hi,
I'd like to answer Florian's mail in details -or think about it further-
but
I do like your suggestions below (all of them). Mind adding them yourself?
My bandwidth is... low today and I'm with my family.I just had a chat with Charles and we discussed about that.
My take is that we put ourselves (TDF people, hired or volunteer) into a
worse situation than our contributors. If Director of Development at XYZ
Corporation wants to join the BoD, he can, and he is paid for his regular
duties. If a Director of Development at TDF wants to join the BoD, he
cannot. Why do we put ourselves into that situation?I'm fine if our BoD has more corporate representatives than TDF ones, but I
want to avoid that we just cannot have TDF people in there, because of our
own rules. This means that we exclude people from joining the bodies and
shaping TDF, just because they are with TDF. With the current bylaws, even
someone working with TDF purely volunteer and having an unpaid officer role
cannot be a part of the BoD, so it's not even about money - it's about
fairness about who is "eligible" to run for a vote in the board.Hope that makes it a bit more clear.
Charles will clarify in the bylaws that officers - except for chairman,
executive director, legal and financial officers - can be part of any
committee. The four mentioned officers cannot be part of BoD or AB.Hope that makes thins a bit more clear.
Yes indeed. So I made two small modifications, one in the officers '
definition and one in the business and transparency subsection.
The CH, ED and the legal and financial officers, as well as any other
potential officers can join any committee and team they want. Except for the
BoD and the AB that the four officers cannot get elected to, and thus cannot
join.
Another modification I made: the solemn address start of process (when
people look for 30% of active members to undersign the address) cannot last
more than one month (otherwise we would have lingering campaigns anti BoD...
best,
Charles.