[Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Hello community!

Lately we have had two resignations from the Hildon Foundation Board. As some have already noted, the Board bylaws state that the Board has seven days to fill a vacancy if the number of Board members falls below 3. If they fail to do so in that time period, an election is triggered.

As you presumably all also noticed, Rob ("SD69") has now appointed two replacement Board Directors, Craig Woodward ("woody14619") and Jim Jagielski, a person who has not been a member of our community, but is an experienced figure in the FOSS world as a whole, and might bring valuable experience to the table. Woody had the recommendation of the Council for this position for a while now, and still does. Jim Jagielski we are unsure about at this time, and thus have no formal Council position for or against. Woody has accepted his appointment, although he expressed a slight reservation about its validity as it was not done at an official Board meeting, something which the Board has mostly insisted should be the case for decisions made in the past. We do not presently know if Jim Jagielski has or hasn't accepted his appointment. (It's worth noting woody14619 ran in the Board election and was one of the closest runners-up.)

That summary out of the way, we bring this to the Community for discussion because we wish to gauge what the Community opinion is about the current situation with the Board: the only member left was appointed earlier, one has just been appointed and accepted, and one has been appointed and might accept their appointment shortly, leaving a completely unelected Board? Furthermore, how does the Community feel about the Board having members from outside the Community? Would the Community members like the Board to hold an election in the near future to validate itself as a Community-elected body again? If so, how soon - immediately, as soon as the Nokia transfer of infrastructure assets is completed, in a certain time period?

And finally, the Bylaws give the Community Council the power to trigger an election for both bodies. Would the Community members like us to exercise this power, if the Board does not initiate its own reelection in the time that the Community would like to see it happen? (On this note, keep in mind that the Council has to call for its own reelection fairly soon anyway - we had our first session in 2012-11-09. This means that if we the current Council are to do this, it will have to be relatively soon, because we have until 2013-04-09 to announce the election. Granted, the Council that follows this one could do the same thing, but it would mean two elections' worth of nomination, contemplation, and voting periods' time before such a move can be undertaken instead of one.)

Sincerely,
Alexander Kozhevnikov
Council Chair
[This post is made on behalf of everyone actively in the current Council]

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

My personal opinion is that the community should have a say in those who represent it on the Board. I say that as the only member of the current Board to have received any votes for that position (I placed 4th in the last election).

I would personally like to see the Board announce elections as soon as it reasonably can, given the current negotiations with Nokia and providers. That said, this will very likely result in a co-election with Council and Board at one time, as was done in the previous cycle. That (again IMPO) would be the least strenuous way to handle this, for the community, the new infrastructure, and the governing bodies involved.

To that affect, I will reflect that to the Board as a new member of that body. My opinion may change based on information I'm not aware of at the moment. If such reasons are valid, I will strive make them as known as I can without breaching my duties as a Board member. My hope is to bring a bit more transparency to the Board where it is reasonable to do so.

Finally, I would like to say that I do not know Jim Jagielski (the other Board appointee) personally. Like many I've spoken with, I am also wary of inviting non-Maemo persons into leadership positions, including the Board. However, from what I've reviewed of his current and past careers, I see a great deal of potential benefit to having him on board. How that will play out is yet to be seen, but I feel the potential benefits may be worth the risk in this case.

Right now, I am continuing my focus on assisting in stabilizing the infrastructure to allow voting in the near future, as Council elections are upcoming in any case in the next couple months. Once I get formal word form the Board and am added to the proper mailing-lists I will no doubt have more to say (and more work to do) in this arena.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Kind invitation to everybody member of maemo community to please post their thoughts on the topic here.

Thanks
jOERG

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

For those who loaded the page before you saw this post, note that I had to edit the post a little bit after the first posting because I hit "enter" on accident before the final wording tweaks.

Personal thoughts on the issue, as a Community member as opposed to elected Councilmember:

I myself think that, while Nokia has yet to sign off the DNS control and other assets to Hildon Foundation, we should avoid disrupting the Board more than it already has been. However, after that is all done and settled, I, if I was in the community looking at this situation, would want to have the election held right after that's done - if the people currently appointed do a good job and earned the Community's trust and respect, they will likely get re-elected. If they didn't, they likely won't.

In the long run, I would also like to see if we can pass an amendment to the bylaws that says that if either body (board or council, but especially Board) has more than 50% of the Directors resign, it triggers an automatic re-election. Whether or not I agree with Rob's current appointment choices (and I tentatively guess that they are good ones, but we'll see how it plays out), the idea that a single left-over Director can repopulate the Board entirely on their own is, frankly, something that should be worrisome for any entity that expects some semblance of democracy to prevail indefinitely in its organization.

More thoughts will be posted in response to whatever gets/got posted after this.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

To everybody who wants this community to keep on: Please comment at this thread and say your thoughts clearly. We need to know that there is enough interest to continue this work, and to finally be able to walk on our own. This won't come without everybody's help and every bit counts, be it financal help, or more importantly administrative help.

The greatest thing you can do for the community right now is to think hard and weigh the possibility of running for board, if there will be an election, or council, for which the election will be in about 8 weeks.

I know from myself that it was a very hard decision to apply, and I did that only after continuous delays of the election, on the last minute. So now is the time to start nurturing the idea in your head and come with a blazing candidate declaration in 4 weeks time.

We absolutely need enough candidates and a big electorate base for next council and/or board election to legitimize what we are doing, and shield ourselves from difficult situations like this, where 2 council members and all 3 board members resigned, in the future.

Thanks for reading,

Michael Demetriou
member of the Maemo Community Council

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

I think these are critical times, and there is no room for extra bureaucracy.

I think the proposed people to Hildon Foundation seem like sensible choices, and IMO go with them without organizing an election. Delays due to elections is not something that benefits our community right now.

And just in case, perhaps we can have a gentlemen's agreement that elections can be organized later in the unlikely event that Foundation takes actions that cause much gnawing of teeth in the community.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

been caught in R.L. issues for the past few weeks and completely missed out on Maemo :(

why am i not surprised to come back and see... board re-election :confused: :rolleyes:

in a way, i'm just echoing ajalkane's reflection on the opportunity of a re-election during a time where the community needs continuity above everything else.
i guess getting Woody on-[to the ]board (pun intended) is probably a move in that direction; Woody knows the community and is (at least somewhat?) familiar with NOKIA & All (Nemein and so on)

but... what about Jim Jagielski :confused: :eek:
i had a quick look @ the wikimedia page Woody provided the link to and... with all due respect, WTF?
Apache? RedHat? except that the guy hopefully may not show up with a Lumia device, i'm not sure what his interest in Maemo may be :confused:

maybe i missed out on a lot more in the last couple weeks, but does Maemo meanwhile aspire to an Apache scale "openness"?

EDIT: Joerg, hope to be online the next couple days; maybe we can touch base?

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Lets be honest. The Maemo community isn't what it used to be, the council has handled roughly 99.9% of what was required for the migration, the HiFo was collecting very minimal and the actual cost of most things were covered by Nokia and other larger providers/companies. The HiFo is a waste of time and resources. The council itself should simply open its own NFP paypal (or other method) style of deposits, find an easy way to file the taxes for it (which is a simple tax form so long as the books are in order). With the devices out there dwindling and the, what is a good word, impotence of activity from the HiFo, it would just be a waste to go out of the way to refill the positions and full control would be better off handed to the council, who, quite honestly, performs 99.9% of the duties anyways. I'm sure they can handle the extra 00.1% of that HiFo workload.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

I'd rather want Jim Jagielski to make a public statement about his motivation to be a HiFo board member. If he really wants to, I didn't see a confirmation so far. And that should happen before the council meeting, so the community/council members to have time to make up their minds. I would also like to have more rationale from SD69, beyond "He is new to maemo, but he should be able to provide valuable organizational insight and assistance as the Foundation struggles to get on its feet" vaporware.

IIRC HiFo's major goal was to "officially" present the community, so Nokia to have a legal entity to which to transfer the Maemo assets. I wonder what has changed and why. And how will help an outsider who has(IMO) NFC about Maemo with achieving that goal in the remaining several weeks(or even less) before Nemein shuts down the servers.

Don't get me wrong, the only thing I have "against" that guy is the lack of any information. And I don't think a wikipedia "CV" page is the way he should be presented to the community. Nothing more, nothing less.

On the other hand we are in very critical period, so I think the best for Maemo and the community is to postpone all the political stuff after the migration to community driven infra is complete (or at least secured).

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

I think somebody who has founded an OSS non-profit corporation, and done it successfully, would help us right now. Technical knowledge of maemo is not necessary because we have plenty of those people around. What we don't have is someone with the experience of managing an OSS non-profit corporation. So this is why I would have Jim on the Board, although I wouldn't have him on the Foundation's Council which is more membership based.

This choice of Board member, when there was no one other than Woody from the community who stepped up, is not a change in direction. It's someone who can help us get to where we want to be. We are still trying to transfer the maemo assets from Nokia.

I suggest people look at his personal page: www.jimjag.com.

I considered an election at this time but decided it is best to move on since there will be one later this year.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

I see the benefit in having someone with Jim's background around but I hope he posts his stand on the appointment soon. People are mostly clueless on who he is.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Jim definitely comes across a lot better on "his" personal page then on the wiki page, which isn't much of a feat, of course.

maybe he could still create a Maemo account and post what his interest (if any?) in Maemo is respectively how he feel he would contribute?

reasonable conclusion, indeed :cool:

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

What we're seeing here is an old-fashioned method of seizing power from SD69. Now that he's the only one, instead of holding an election as required in the constitution (note the election trigger clause has no seven-day time limit), he's appointing His People. woody's probably fine, but the fact that he's bringing in some other guy who can't even be bothered to make a maemo.org account frankly spells the end of any credibility here. This is a pretty common move when you want to make sure that out of two non-SD69 people, one will always vote his way.

This is a total attack on the democratic nature of the Board constitution, and should not be accepted by anyone, including the authorities of the state under whose laws the Foundation is formed.

If you people let him get away with this, you can kiss the Hildon Foundation goodbye. It is 100% SD69's podium from here on out.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

This is incorrect. Revision 7 of the ByLaws (which is the last revision posted here on the forum, and officially voted in), Section IV, paragraph 6 reads:

Not quite. In my accepting the position, assuming the appointment is valid, currently there are at least two Directors. Until Jim's public announcement of his acceptance, we both have an equal vote. Meaning for anything to move forward, we must both agree on it, as a conflict will result in deadlock.

There must also be a voice/video meeting between the three of us, which should happen very soon now. As of yet, I've had no communication with anyone else involved in HiFo, be that other active/appointed Directors or agents of the Board (Treasurer, Communications, etc). To be fair, I've been rather busy and haven't mailed them directly myself either.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Time for you to drop your conspiracy hat. Are you running for one of the spots or what?

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Excellent. At least he worked out the obstructions before he played the game.


And what happens if Jim refuses the appointment, or simply doesn't bother responding? Will there be an election, or will it be more "well, we're having one later anyway, so we'll just sit here for now."



Nope! But this isn't the first time we've seen SD69 ruin things. Or are we not allowed to talk about NDAs?

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

(reserved for future comments -- all the cool guys are posting this)

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

@stenny - the council can always call for elections of both (board and council) bodies, stay cool :)

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

http://www.mobilespeedtest.com/results/1121085234.jpg

that stenny guy sounds like a feud of old of this forum, doesn't he... :confused::rolleyes:
one who should know all too well how this forum deals with usurpation, whether technical or factual :mad:

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

There seems to be a misunderstanding.

Maemo Community Council is not the same thing as Hildon Foundation Council. It thus has no official relationship to Hildon Foundation Board, and can't call for elections of Hildon Foundation Board or Hildon Foundation Council. It can call for elections of the next maemo council, which seems pointless in my opinion, since Nokia long ago stopped talking to maemo council.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Hey, how many councils do we have over here?

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Being one of the founders, I have to say, I disagree with this interpretation.

My intent in the last election cycle was to hold it in such a way that it met with both standards, therefore having one group of people that would hold positions on both Maemo Community Council and the Foundation Council, to ensure a smooth transition. I believe I did that effectively, thus allowing that the election was valid by both rule sets for both bodies.

I made this publicly known, both to current Council, the Founders, and potential Board and Council members. The initial Board was in agreement that the Maemo Community Council would serve as the first official Foundation Council as well, again to ease the transition as it occurred (not requiring another election once hand over from Nokia happened). There's a retrospective note of this in the minutes of the Decemeber 8th meeting.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Two. One is pretty much the same maemo council as it has always been and the other is the new foundation council. The reason for this, which might not have been apparent, is that Hildon Foundation might in the future have an OSS project other than maemo.org. For example, a potential partner or sponsor may not be interested in working with legacy maemo because it wants to be future looking, but it would be interested in doing another project with us. There is more flexibility if this other project and the Foundation in general is not compelled to use the same rules that have been used in maemo.org. Notice that the Foundation Council has the ability to write different rules on membership and elections, and need not do things the same way as at maemo.org. For example, imagine if Jolla had decided to work with us, we could have worked out a different arrangement with them. I get comments from time to time expressing the mistaken notion that Hildon Foundation was founded just to save maemo.org, and it is not limited in that way. So this post should clear that up as well.

This is correct (except for the single word "Foundation"). The Board's minutes say: “The Board votes the newly elected (maemo community) Council in to take responsibility for running, administrating, and managing daily operations of maemo.org.”

So the then existing maemo community council was made the first council in Hildon Foundation and is responsible for maemo.org when it gets handed over from Nokia to Hildon Foundation. For continuity's sake, the council will already be in place for the transition and an election will not be required at that time. Hildon Board voluntarily took the maemo community's decision, adopted it, and has been working with Maemo Community Council for months in preparation for the handover - to everyone's ultimate benefit.

It can also be seen that the functions mentioned in the Board's minutes are not the functions of the Hildon Foundation Council which are stated in the Foundation bylaws to be related to membership and elections. The foundation bylaws also task the Foundation Council with coming up with new membership and election rules, which again is an intentional split with maemo community council.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

So HiFo failed for how long? 5 months? 6? To appoint a proper HiFo council? That kinda sounds pretty odd.
Also while HiFo maybe isn't limited to mere maemo.org stewardship for obvious reasons of nobody but God knows the future, it's still damn sure HiFo's primary and most noble duty to take care about maemo (incl maemo6 aka meego) interests, and nobody planned to create a HiFo entity to supervise and reign maemo, decide on maemo's future, or move maemo elsewhere or redefine what maemo means. Any such stuff gets decided by every single member of maemo community, nobody else!
What does that mean? >>...if Jolla had decided to work with us << what kind of work would that be, done by whom (on "our" side, not Jolla's)? And what would HiFo do to maemo assets when such agreement was a reality? >>...a potential partner or sponsor may not be interested in working with legacy maemo because it wants to be future looking, but it would be interested in doing another project with us.<< Who's "us"? What were the benefits for maemo community? Who asked community about their notions regarding that? How's that covered by "HiFo mission"?
/j

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

By this, I'm assuming you mean working with groups like Jolla. You've worded it poorly enough that community ablaze, screaming about HiFo separating from the community. :mad:

True and False. This clause was placed for two reasons:
1> To allow the Council to adjust the voting laws in the event that Karma was no longer available due to technical issues.
2> To allow the Council and the Board to later amend them to include new groups as we merged with new "friends".

With proper input, for example, FC could include other criteria for allowing a linked community (like the ScratchBox community) a way to vote in elections. Maybe by giving them the ability to add the equivalent of Karma points by commits in that realm without requiring it all be filtered and duplicated in the garage.

It was never intended to be a way to cause a split between Hildon Foundation and the community.

Yes and no. The mission of the Hildon "Foundation is to promote and progress the future availability of Maemo® derived or inspired open source software, and related toolkits, for mobile devices." That's from section II of the ByLaws. While it's not limited to strictly the project of keeping maemo.org alive, the key focus is clearly to keep that infrastructure alive. Right now that's maemo.org.

Again, your poor choice of wording is leading others to believe that you are for drifting off and away from maemo.org.

Again, this is a reiteration in the second meeting of things discussed in the first meeting. December 8th was not the first meeting. The first meeting was the cluster-flux of google audio conferencing where the bylaws were voted on an accepted. As a founder, I was in and out of the meeting as technical glitches kept bouncing me, but I do recall this topic.

By which, apparently everyone but you was saying that the Maemo Community Council was in fact also the Foundation Council. If this were not the case it would make little sense, since how would the next election happen? The Foundation Council was to set the rules for the election. How can we have those rules created without a Foundation Council?

And how is that to be done if Maemo Community Council is not also Foundation Council? Just made my point. Thanks.

Wrong. It was, in fact a way to allow the Board Bylaws to be written up without including all the crap about Karma, as the first draft or two did. Would you like copies of the e-mail where we discussed removing this and having it formed by Council later, after the migration? I have them still. There was no discussion about doing this to separate powers between two Councils. The debate at that time was if there was even a NEED for a Council, not if there was a need for two of them...

The primary reason this was done was because we could not predict if Karma was even going to be an option in 6 months to a year, depending on how the transition went. It was not intended as a split from Maemo Community Council. Quite the contrary, it was a tool, giving them the power to update the rules to allow a smooth transition as the community adjusted into it's new and possibly technically limited home.

If it needs to be official then I'll state clearly: I vote, as a Director of the Board, that Maemo Community Council as it stands is in fact dually titled the Foundation Council. This was, in my belief, the intent from the beginning. Being the primary author of the ByLaws I think my belief on intentions would hold quite a bit of merit in this matter.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

The adherence to words and semantics instead of on the community's prosperity deeply disappoints me.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Hmm let's see; SD69 was part of the BoD who screwed up communications with Jolla by acting like spoiled brats who had a Community to back them up and SD69 was the one proposing NDAs and such bs that resulted in Jolla giving up on HiFo.

Now he thinks he owns the Community and can decide for everybody else even though he's an unelected BoD. HiFo was made to sign documents for the Community-at-large mainly. If Rob you think that's not the case please resign and gtfo as its you who falls foul of things.

I vote for a re-election to occur so that Rob is kicked out pronto instead of splitting the Community or damaging it with his actions. His words seem like if Jolla were ready to sponsor stuff he would have done everything required to make this Jolla's home instead of maemo.

Those Community members who think SD69 is doing everybody a great deal of service by volunteering get this right; 95% of migration and related work has been done by the Council and things would have been done much faster if not for Rob constantly interfering and using his technical incompetence to block things proposed by Council.

The Council have actually tolerated him and his shenanigans for so long just because they have been wanting things signed and handed over soon instead of being in-limbo as they have been in the past >3months.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Why don't you ban him with your moderator rights?

A reelection don't solve anything. Why not work out the issues instead?

Reelection is a childish way of solving things just becouse you don't handles the issues and probably just got new simular issues and will you solve them with another election?

Point out the issues and work on them. I was elected to lead, not to read so, please. Don't post so long messages.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Dave999,

I'm a moderator to keep the forum tidy NOT to force my opinion on someone or to ban someone just because I'm in disagreement with them. I DON'T mix my moderator privileges with my opinion or thoughts and neither should you.

Why I said re-election is because by right 3 people were elected to form the BoD; all the 3 are no longer in the BoD. SD69 wasn't elected at all and hence it seems very undemocratic for 1 unelected person to be choosing 2 more unelected BoD.

Obviously with his drastic views that were never mentioned when he was being chosen are something I disagree with too hence I vote for a re-election that gives people who voted and are eligible to vote the choice of BoD instead of an unelected BoD.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Exellent, that's a valid and stronger argument than your all in attack with lots of crap reasons. I suggest you ban your previous post and replace ing it with your last post. It shorter too.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

I think HiFo board reputation and legality got tainted/corrupted by all the unfortunate events during last few weeks, and it's strongly advisable that HiFo board seeks for new confirmation by community, aka re-elections, to gain a strong position again in representing community to other parties. Same time we should sort this HiFo council thing and fix the bylaws by some amendment or executive regulations which the community would have to endorse during next election.
Community council elections will start in three weeks and I strongly suggest to ponder using this opportunity for parallel HiFo elections.

my 2 personal Eurocents
/j

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

With my Community Council hat on, I too am in favor of both bodies re-election. If I am wrong and board is acting in the best interest of the community, no harm done as election will prove one way or another.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Ok, I'm running for Office. Where do I sign?

You can see me as a Arnold Schwarzenegger type of politician.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

For me personally, there's no diminution of maemo.org. My god I just spent two hours on IRC yesterday all about maemo.org. But I do think about the future as well, and would love to see for example an updated OSS for modern devices having the same form factor as N8x0/N900.

As for the Board, they have probably spent 95% of their time to date on maemo.org. And that includes paying attention to having maemo.org remain pretty much the way it always has been. So that's why there hasn't been much attention paid to other stuff.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Your sock puppet has two more days, then you're going to have to hold an election anyway. If you had a shred of self-respect, or any respect for the maemo community, there would be a Hildon Foundation election whether or not your designated FOSS politician accepts a spot overseeing a Foundation he cares nothing about.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Just one point: this condition about >7 days already kicked in with woody accepting his appointment not in time of 7 days after ivan resigned. ->re-election. No matter what. I really had preferred Rob going that reasonable step without pointing him at the § stuff, rather he'd appreciate that it's needed for restoring damaged reputation of HiFo.

cheers
jOERG

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

I plan on writing up a letter introducing myself and my reasons for accepting the appointment, which were based 100% on helping the community and the foundation and in reply to a post on another mailing list which asked for help.

However, before I do (since I want to spend some time on the letter, since it may be my only opportunity to do so), I wanted to respond to this "FOSS politician" crack.

Next time you respond to a thread, it would be useful and more powerful to your argument if you did research and obtained "facts". I am a developer, a hacker, and have been hacking FOSS for decades. Whatever "organizational" or "political" roles I may have, are due to my activities as a coder. As far as caring nothing about HiFo, I at least agreed to help, which seems more than many other people did, based on the fact that the directors felt the need to go outside the community to seek help and guidance.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Hi Jim!
Welcome! :-) Looking forward to your letter. Please also feel invited to Friday's public council meetings (IRC:freenode.net #maemo-meeting 1800UTC) where we could chat in a more direct and less formal manner to learn to know each other.
Please excuse possibly harsh words in your direction in some posts here, community is a bit upset about the perceived fact that HiFo hasn't asked loud enough for volunteers here and next door in maemo community channels, at least that seems to be the reason why there's a generally tensioned mood in community at the moment.
Quite obviously you're not the one to blame for any of that, if there was something to blame to anybody. Again, welcome on board and many thanks for your help. much appreciated :-)
Looking forward to meet you on IRC.

cheers
jOERG

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

Bravo, nice first post. Next time you respond to a thread try to be less arrogant. It is your duty to represent yourself to the community which asks perfectly valid questions. Whether you like the tone of some of the posts is irrelevant, as (IIRC) there was nothing personal against you. Of course that's in case the fact you are unknown for the most of the community doesn't insult you.

Despite that you may find the above arrogant too, I would like to give you my warm welcome aboard. I'd rather take all this "drama" as a miscommunication, not as bad intentions. Time will tell.

P.S.
BTW I am developer with more than 20 years of coding experience too.

Re: [Council] Community Thoughts About Board Reelection
 

welcome Jim!

thank you for coming forward and considering giving some of your time for Maemo.org.
as you already noticed the exchanges around here get very quickly (over-)heated and arguments get thrown around which are not always fair or even truthful.
i hope that you won't mind being a candidate for election to the next Hildon Foundation Board of Directors rather then "invited" into the (barely) existing one.
considering your record of OSS contributions i believe you would be a gain for our community but i'm still wondering what leads you our way?

• pure Saint Bernard soul, rescuing a community that seems to lose itself in an administrative and technical blizzard?
• the challenge of a platform you (probably) never heard of before?
• ???

feel free to answer in your letter.

with best regards,
mr.c.