Re: Corporate Stuff

> > Nat's idea was no ONE company have over 50% membership on the board.
> I'll play devil's advocate here and say that even a restriction like
> this is not necessarily justifiable, though I think it is more
> justifiable than a limit on overall "corporate" membership. If the
> people doing the electing are concerned about such concentration then
> they are perfectly free to spread their votes between candidates from
> different companies.

I don't think that overall restrictions on corporate membership are
reasonable, as corporate involvement in GNOME is only going to grow from
here. The explicit restriction was at my request as a safeguard to ensure
that the foundation, which is supposed to be an independent, non-profit
body for guiding GNOME cannot be subverted by one company with an
absolutely majority on the board. In fact, we might even want to consider
lowering it below 50% as Maciej suggested, because even 5 out of 11 seats
is a pretty strong majority. However, if we decide to always only elect
the board as a whole, I rarely think that this will become an issue,
unless a member is hired by a company giving them an absolutely majority,
in which someone has to step down (and someone else needs to be elected).

Anyway, aren't there legal issues with having a for-profit corporate
entity with control over a non-profit foundation?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]