Re: Affiliation change and stepping down

[Cosimo Cecchi <cosimoc gnome org>]

Hi Tobi,

While I understand that you might have hoped for another resolution from the Board, now that our decision is public, I trust you understand that it was taken solely with the best interest of the electorate and the wider GNOME community in mind.

Like others have mentioned already in this thread, the Board is confident that the actions taken are appropriate and in compliance with the bylaws. We certainly always welcome initiatives to make those rules more transparent and efficient, and you should feel free to propose an amendment as described in article XVII if you think the regulation around changes of affiliation and vacant seats is unclear or unfair.

Please reach out if you feel like discussing this further!

Cheers,
Cosimo

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 7:30 AM, Tobias Mueller <muelli cryptobitch de> wrote:

Hi.

On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 12:30:24PM +0100, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
> If I recall correctly, it's not a rule for the board to pick someone
> based on election results.
That's true and false.

It's true in the sense that the bylaws do not govern change of affiliation
after the election results have been obtained.

It's false in that there is a rule for following the results when more
than 40% of the directors are of one company <https://people.gnome.org/~tobiasmue/bylaws2012/bylaws.html#number-and-qualification-of-directors>.

Now that can find yourself on either side of the fence, as to whether
you think that rule applies.

In any case you can ask yourself what *should* be done.
And I think that if you have the option of either following the interests of
your electorate or deciding for yourself, that following the electorate is
simply of better style.

Cheers,
  Tobi

_______________________________________________
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list gnome org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list