Board/Minutes/2022-02-S2S/Membership prerequisites

From OpenStreetMap Foundation
< Board‎ | Minutes‎ | 2022-02-S2S
Revision as of 00:31, 4 March 2022 by Dorothea (talk | contribs) (+ collaborative notes from the "membership prerequisites" session)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Membership prerequisites

Collaborative notes of board members during the meeting.

Participants

Board members

  • Amanda McCann
  • Eugene Alvin Villar
  • Guillaume Rischard
  • Jean-Marc Liotier
  • Roland Olbricht
  • Tobias Knerr

Guests

  • Allen Gunn (facilitator)
  • Dorothea Kazazi (administrative assistant)

Not Present

  • Mikel Maron (on leave)

Officers and board
Biographies

Background

Collaborative notes

Text of 2020 special resolution approved by the membership (Vote 3)

"The board of directors shall, together with the OSMF Membership Working Group, work on a set of proposals to ensure that all successful applicants for membership or associate membership in the OpenStreetMap Foundation have made a reasonable amount of contributions to OpenStreetMap. The specific form of the contributions (e.g. mapping vs. non-mapping) does not make a difference for the fulfillment of these prerequisites. The board shall submit these proposals as possible resolutions at a general meeting in 2021. "

  • Membership has already approved that prerequisites are needed.
  • Membership has already agreed that mapping vs. non-mapping contributions does not matter
  • Supporter membership could be a useful addition
    • Pay a certain amount of money as supporting membership, w/o voting rights
  • Question: Do we leave specifics flexible (changeable through board decision)?
    • Proposal: No hard text in the resolution, it be left to board decisions
  • 42 days within a specific number of years
  • what if the membership rejects? do we want a multiple-choice-resolution mechanism?
    • Amanda: will still check the box from the 2020 Annual General Meeting
    • Amanda: use a ranked choice vote?
    • Guillaume: we could leave that question until later

Current framework doesn't force The Board to use a specific method. Formalization and transparency are possible within the current institutional frame.

Scoring would provide a flexible method for including a number of diverse criteria (qualitative and quantitative) and weight them.

Suggestion is for the Board to (later) collaboratively produce a list of prerequisites.

Similar topic once (2019-12)


The Board decides:

Point of order: This decision needs to be a circular resolution because screen-to-screen meetings are not regular Board meetings.

  • To conduct a formal survey the membership on the proposed measures to be taken, on whether further, less or different measures are necessary.
  • Pending membership feedback, the Board will only accept application for new normal and associate memberships from persons who have mapped over 15 days, and have been a registered OpenStreetMap user for at least three months. The Board instructs MWG to implement these restrictions.
  • Pending the above, cancel the plans for a general meeting on April 30th.

Comments:

  • "consult" is not a special resolution
  • Survey should convey:
    • This is no silver bullet against takeover protection
    • Allows us to answer additional questions
    • We still need the leeway to adapt the measure if it needs adjustment

Rationale:

  • Mapping is a core activity of OpenStreetMap and having at least 15 days of mapping (which is set as a low bar), establishes "skin in the game".
  • 15 days lifetime mapping and 3 months since registration (suggestion by Mikel Maron on osmf-talk) demonstrates that someone has familiarity with OSM. It’s not overly onerous to individually achieve. Putting the takeover question aside, it’s a reasonable expectation of contribution. It avoids punting judgment calls to the Board on non mapping time.
  • The simplified criteria is also very easy to evaluate, can possibly be automated, and wouldn't put a significant additional burden on Membership Working Group.
  • Does this address takeover protection? No, but it addresses the rationale of the 2020 special resolution that "would more firmly establish the OSMF as an entity serving the people and communities who create OpenStreetMap".

Concern about survey

  • GDPR issue regarding sending the survey to OSMF members.

Decisions

  • Pending membership feedback, the Board will only accept application for new normal and associate memberships from persons who have mapped over 15 days, and have been a registered OpenStreetMap user for at least three months. The Board instructs MWG to implement these restrictions.
  • Pending the above, cancel the plans for a general meeting on April 30th.

Action items

  • Tobias with Guillaume to decide on the wording of the email to the membership by the 3rd of March. "The board plans to adopt the following measures at the March 24 board meeting, pending feedback from the community."

Pending issues, not addressed

  • Paid mapping