Board/Minutes/2020-10-S2S/Board transparency

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

e.g via Communications Working Group

Notes by participants. Might be enriched.

This session took place in parallel with "OSMF fundraising". A summary was provided to the other group.


Board members

  • Tobias Knerr (host)
  • Joost Schouppe
  • Paul Norman

The rest of the board members participated in the parallel session "OSMF fundraising".



  • current state with transparency is generally decent, there are some areas we could work on.
  • our way of extending the conversation to the community is a bit one-sided -> can we do more to make the community part of it?
  • when we take stuff public early, the conversation is sometimes low value; osmf-talk can be draining.
  • Discourse transition would help with communications (technical reasons, more modern UI, ...)
  • consultations, emails (unsubscribe possible?)
  • closed mid-month chats.
    • not strictly new (was on private email + IRC before).
    • maybe offer access to observers (like microgrants committee) -> no consensus.
    • there is some desire among board members to be able to say stupid things in private.
  • public meetings work pretty well.
  • improve perceived transparency by spreading already-public info from documents (minutes etc.) that few people actually read to more accessible formats (blog posts, ...) -> Get Communication Working Group (CWG) could help?
  • risk that doing more in the same time overwhelms attention of members.


  • Express board's support for migration of to Discourse.
  • Start using the OSMF subforum for consultations once the migration has happened.
  • Get Communication Working Group (CWG) help in more engaging communications -> bring this up in the upcoming board+CWG meeting.