Re: Questions for candidates - board processes & significance

[Diego Escalante Urrelo <diegoe gnome org>]

Hey Dave,

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Dave Neary <dneary gnome org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I was away last week travelling, so I'm coming late to the election
> campaign. I have almost decided who I would like to vote for, but there are
> still a few things which are important to me when considering a prospective
> board member.
>
> 1. If elected, will you seek a named position (chairman/treasurer/secretary)
> on the board? If so, why?
>

Not specially interested, but I could help with any of the three.

> 2. Board meetings are minuted, and these minutes are published regularly.
> However, the board also increasingly makes decisions on board-list with the
> Apache +1/0/-1 convention. Would you support the minuting of these votes,
> including recording any -1 votes?
>

It was suggested on another thread, sure, not a bad idea.

> 3. I think financial transparency is important. If you plan on applying for
> the treasurer position, what changes (if any) would you propose for the
> budgeting process? How often would you publish financial reports for the
> foundation? Are you happy with the level of transparency in the board's
> finances now?
>

I'm not thinking on applying for treasurer. I think Germán has done a
really good job, and I'd like to give him no chance but to stay as the
treasurer.
Transparency has been good, I believe there's not much point in
producing too many frequent reports, it's time consuming and doesn't
really give people a lot of information they don't already have from
the annual budget.

> 4. Our relationship with a number of groups has suffered this year - and one
> of the lesser known ones (but one I'm involvedd in) is the Libre Graphics
> Meeting organisers (a group of people representing a couple of dozen "free
> art" projects). Are you aware that the LGM organisers withdrew all the funds
> that the GNOME Foundation was managing for them this year, because they have
> been unhappy with the responsiveness and quality of communication with the
> foundation over the past 2 - 3 years? Do you have any thoughts on why this
> particular relationship degraded? And will you commit to handling or
> delegating answers to all time-critical queries which come to the board
> during your term?
>

I can't comment on the specifics, but if LGM has grown to a point
where we can't help them timely, or we just have been too busy with
other things... well, shouldn't they create a Foundation? ;)
We should help other groups achieve their goals whenever we can, but
our prime interest is still GNOME.

> 5. In general, as a board member communication is vital to keep people
> outside the board informed whenever there is a delay or when extra input is
> needed on something they're working on. For incumbents, are you happy with
> the level of communication & reactivity in the current board? For new
> candidates, what would you like to do to ensure that the communication &
> reactivity of the board improves in the coming term?
>

I haven't had much interaction with the Board during this period so I
couldn't tell if they are more or less responsive, but I haven't seen
or heard of any big omission from the Board this period.

>From previous experience, as I proposed in my candidacy, I'd like to
make sure the Board has good internal feedback and things don't get
stalled on slow responsiveness. This is something where I believe I
can help.

> 6. Board members are ambassadors for the foundation. I think it's important
> that board members be social, and be nice. Are you nice?
>

Yes, I think I'm social and nice.
At the very least, I'm approachable and anything but intimidating :).


Diego