1 |
On Thu, 2011-03-31 at 07:13 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 7:11 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > There is nothing saying the trustees can elect themselves as officers. |
5 |
> > Again I had specific intention when I helped author the current bylaws. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> There is nothing in the bylaws which prevents the trustees from doing so. |
8 |
|
9 |
Again having been an author of the bylaws, clearly I did not go far |
10 |
enough to clarify such, as previously stated. |
11 |
|
12 |
> Considering that a problem in the past has been an inability to even |
13 |
> fill all of the trustee roles, I'm not sure that we're going to |
14 |
> improve things by constraining the foundation to find additional |
15 |
> people to fill the officer roles. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> I'm all for appointing additional people as officers. However, they |
18 |
> need to step up and volunteer first, or be willing to work for fairly |
19 |
> little. |
20 |
|
21 |
Not every position requires a volunteer. Should we expect a CPA to work |
22 |
for free? Clearly if volunteers cannot get necessary, and mandated |
23 |
things done in a reasonable amount of time. Its time for a new approach. |
24 |
|
25 |
> > First you say I am incorrect, now I am correct. Not sure why trustees |
26 |
> > are flip flopping so much. |
27 |
> |
28 |
> Uh, I'm not sure I see any inconsistency here. |
29 |
|
30 |
Might want to re-read. There were comments saying the financial |
31 |
paperwork had been filed and things were in order. Money recovered from |
32 |
old bank account etc. Then it turns out there will be an audit. You |
33 |
don't audit things that are in order as previously stated. |
34 |
|
35 |
Then the issue on waiting for a treasurer to conduct the audit. When a |
36 |
trustee had already assumed that role, or at least claimed such prior to |
37 |
other comments. |
38 |
|
39 |
> You're pointing out that the bylaws don't explicitly grant the |
40 |
> trustees the power to appoint themselves as officers. |
41 |
> |
42 |
> The trustees are pointing out that the bylaws don't explicitly forbid |
43 |
> the trustees the power to appoint themselves as officers. |
44 |
> |
45 |
> Both are true. |
46 |
|
47 |
Again I did not go far enough when helping to author the current bylaws. |
48 |
I had specific intention which people are discarding, and interpreting |
49 |
in ways other than I had intended. I hope that makes more sense now. |
50 |
|
51 |
|
52 |
> > You keep saying you are fine with 5 trustees. There is nothing imposing |
53 |
> > that limit, and the number should be much higher. Even with elections |
54 |
> > not much point, unless more are running than open seats. Which since |
55 |
> > there can be up to 21 trustees. There is plenty of open seats. |
56 |
> |
57 |
> I think we need to have some balance here. In the past we've had |
58 |
> difficulty filling all the trustee slots as it is. In fact, last year |
59 |
> we didn't even have an election. |
60 |
|
61 |
Yes, and there was not elections for a few years prior to 2008. Till I |
62 |
greased the wheels and got them spinning. Not that I am anything special |
63 |
or wonderful, just saw nothing happening, so made something happen good |
64 |
or bad :) |
65 |
|
66 |
> Having more seats would increase the labor pool a little, but could |
67 |
> lead to issues if we can't fill them all in future elections. |
68 |
|
69 |
The amount of trustees can fluctuate, nothing wrong with that. It does |
70 |
not have to be a fixed number, or the same year after year. |
71 |
|
72 |
> Also, not having an election basically makes the trustees a list of anybody |
73 |
> who volunteered for the job, and doesn't give the foundation |
74 |
> membership a real chance to vet them via election. |
75 |
|
76 |
I am not sure there is much difference to straight up volunteering and |
77 |
being elected. In all honesty most people care little about the |
78 |
foundation. I really doubt they spend much time thinking about the roles |
79 |
people will play as trustees and elect them based on such. |
80 |
|
81 |
> Just having an election also imposes a very minimal barrier to entry |
82 |
> (you have to be at least interested enough to get involved so that |
83 |
> people recognize your name). |
84 |
|
85 |
That alone could be a problem. There could be experienced senior people |
86 |
in Gentoo who are just quite doing their work. They would have a hard |
87 |
time being elected, not being well known. After all elections are more |
88 |
about popularity than qualifications ;) |
89 |
|
90 |
|
91 |
> I don't think anybody disputes that. Every member has an opportunity |
92 |
> every other year to get rid of any trustee they dislike. Every member |
93 |
> also has an opportunity to volunteer to help out. The trustees are |
94 |
> volunteers like everybody else in Gentoo - if you have an itch scratch |
95 |
> it! I'd certainly like to see us catch up on tax compliance, but I'm |
96 |
> not going to bug the current trustees to death until they quit, |
97 |
|
98 |
FYI I was bugged to death, thus I resigned and stepped down. Not to |
99 |
mention I realized problems back in 2008 with the treasurer. I could not |
100 |
get others to realize such, thus my efforts were futile at the time. |
101 |
Thus I am not surprised in the least regarding the present state of |
102 |
things :) |
103 |
|
104 |
> as |
105 |
> simply pointing out problems doesn't fix them. It isn't bad to point |
106 |
> out problems, but we're not going to fix them by replying to each |
107 |
> other's emails endlessly. |
108 |
|
109 |
Again I never had any intention of starting a lengthy thread. I really |
110 |
just wanted one reply to my first post and thats it. |
111 |
|
112 |
> Should the US Constitution be re-ratified every time there is a new |
113 |
> general election (who is that John Hancock guy anyway - I never voted |
114 |
> for him!)? The purpose of listing names in the the articles and |
115 |
> bylaws was to bootstrap the organization. I don't think we need to |
116 |
> amend them every time there is an election - that is what public |
117 |
> notices / minutes / etc are for. |
118 |
|
119 |
Then that stuff should be removed and not require the bylaws to be |
120 |
updated to reflect the current state of things. Problem solved :) |
121 |
|
122 |
> Delegation only works when people are willing to be delegated to. In |
123 |
> most organizations this is accomplished by issuing them paychecks. An |
124 |
> organization the size of Gentoo would quickly run out of money trying |
125 |
> to do it that way. Everybody involved in this chain is a volunteer, |
126 |
> and you don't get volunteers to do more work by telling them that |
127 |
> they're doing a lousy job, generally. |
128 |
|
129 |
That is not true. There are quite many situations where volunteers are |
130 |
requested and directed to perform certain tasks. If that was not the |
131 |
case there would be chaos, and/or things won't get done. Even when you |
132 |
volunteer, you don't just get to do what ever you want. I can think of a |
133 |
considerable number of volunteer positions, where you have roles and |
134 |
duties. |
135 |
|
136 |
Food kitchens, clergy at church (alter people, not ministers, etc), Red |
137 |
Cross volunteers, big brother/sister, etc. |
138 |
|
139 |
> I'm not for brushing problems under the rug either, but leadership in |
140 |
> a volunteer organization is less about delegation and more about |
141 |
> inspiration. Sure, you need to use the resources you do have, but you |
142 |
> have to exercise care about how you do it. |
143 |
|
144 |
I agree, and I don't see the current state of things to be |
145 |
inspirational. I had no involvement in there not being elections in |
146 |
2010, or when ever. Clearly the foundation loses steam on a recurring |
147 |
basis :) |
148 |
|
149 |
> Well, it certainly isn't the worst state of affairs I've seen in the |
150 |
> foundation. :) |
151 |
|
152 |
I agree, but given there has been a active board since 2008. I am a |
153 |
little surprised and did have higher expectations. |
154 |
|
155 |
> It does need fixing. I'd really like to see us set |
156 |
> up some procedures we can work by that will make it completely clear |
157 |
> to officers what their duties are in terms of filings/etc. |
158 |
|
159 |
Well the bylaws state officer duties quite well. But does seem things |
160 |
need to be spelled out more ;) |
161 |
|
162 |
> Yes, I know they've been hashed out in this thread / various websites |
163 |
> / etc. I was thinking more in terms of: |
164 |
> Step 0 - For the period between x and y |
165 |
> Step 1 - go to the Gentoo check register located at this link |
166 |
> Step 2 - add up all transactions meeting this critiera and put it in |
167 |
> this field on form abc |
168 |
> .... |
169 |
> Step n - Have the following officers sign the form: ... |
170 |
> Step m - Have the form filed with agency foo by <date> |
171 |
> Step o - Make a copy, redact the following information (...), post a |
172 |
> scan at ..., and update the index at ... |
173 |
> |
174 |
> We should basically have a checklist for the financial/legal health of |
175 |
> the organization. It would be trivial for anybody to assess where |
176 |
> things stand, and if something isn't done it would be clear what needs |
177 |
> to be done. |
178 |
|
179 |
It can't hurt, and really most anything else in Gentoo is documented as |
180 |
such, recruiting procedures for recruiters, etc. |
181 |
|
182 |
> Then we need to start catching up since we're behind. In my |
183 |
> experience dealing with regulators (granted, in a somewhat different |
184 |
> capacity) this is exactly how compliance issues are addressed. |
185 |
> Regulators don't mind past sins as much if it is clear that the |
186 |
> organization is taking clear steps to address them and avoid them in |
187 |
> the future. And, in any case if we don't have a clear plan for |
188 |
> staying compliant than all the work we perform catching up will just |
189 |
> get left behind. |
190 |
|
191 |
Correct if we bring it to their attention and its being actively worked |
192 |
on an acknowledging present lack of compliance. They tend to be much |
193 |
more forgiving. When they come to you, its bad :) |
194 |
|
195 |
> > Instead the trustees seem to discount and discard such, which is quite |
196 |
> > alarming and sad at the same time. |
197 |
> |
198 |
> I don't see anybody discounting the financial issues. They just |
199 |
> haven't solved them in a week. |
200 |
|
201 |
Well more like years, but I am giving them time now that some noise has |
202 |
been made. Few sparks and a match or two toss into the kindling :) |
203 |
|
204 |
> I have mixed feelings about this entire email chain. |
205 |
|
206 |
Same here and I some what regret it, but I also regret being silent and |
207 |
going away for years. Since that did not make things better. |
208 |
|
209 |
> On the one hand, it doesn't hurt to have a wake-up call and to bring |
210 |
> attention to the issues. |
211 |
|
212 |
FYI I did mention this stuff in polite and gentle ways. With inquiries |
213 |
and such. But even on this thread, things are not really being taken |
214 |
seriously, or understanding the importance and gravity of the situation, |
215 |
potential impact, etc. |
216 |
|
217 |
> On the other hand, it is really easy to |
218 |
> point out that a bunch of people aren't getting a job done that |
219 |
> historically nobody ever was able to completely keep up with. |
220 |
|
221 |
Not true, we were getting allot done in the first half of 2008, which I |
222 |
was in part helping to drive. In fact quite possibly did more then than |
223 |
has happened since, and/or prior to then. Just takes someone who wants |
224 |
to see things get done ASAP and puts their time where their mouth is, |
225 |
just as I did before :) |
226 |
|
227 |
> I think it can be done, and perhaps if I get elected I'll be eating |
228 |
> those words. However, it is a lot easier to point out problems than |
229 |
> fix them. |
230 |
|
231 |
I was working to fix these problems long ago. I am not simply stating |
232 |
things from someone who is just seeking to point out problems. Now at |
233 |
this time I am not sure I would ever want to get involved or do the work |
234 |
again. For a variety of reasons. |
235 |
|
236 |
> I think our trustees have earned their $0 paycheck |
237 |
|
238 |
FYI I removed provisions in the bylaws that allowed trustees to pay |
239 |
themselves :) |
240 |
|
241 |
> - while |
242 |
> we're not where we need to be the foundation is much further from the |
243 |
> brink than it was a few years ago. |
244 |
|
245 |
Not really, its risking losing its charter again and this time for worse |
246 |
reasons. I would not be making the noise that I am if things were |
247 |
otherwise. Keep in mind I was also a driving force in getting the |
248 |
foundation reinstated. I have a keen awareness of such things :) |
249 |
|
250 |
-- |
251 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
252 |
Obsidian-Studios, Inc. |
253 |
http://www.obsidian-studios.com |