Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Since joerg asked for publishing this, here it is (the original mail went to council, techstaff and board):

Dear new councilors and juiceme,

first of all, since this is my first official mail to the new Council, a very warm welcome, I'm glad to see each of you made it! This will be a long read but I believe it's worth to mention.

As new councilors you are facing the change of our communitys legal entity, again. Hopefully, this time for good. From some comments on what council is, I read that it has not been made clear what council is and what it is going to be in the future.

Councils' wiki-page still states that With the MC eV, Council remains the representative for community, the associated members. Only thing that changes is that it's not directed towards some 3rd party anymore but the MC eV itself, which it is an entity of. So since we are self-organized now, how much sense would it make to simply replace Nokia by HiFo/MC eV? Isn't the conduit-role somewhat obsolete by now since all "HiFo/MC eV-generated information" comes from and is adressed to our own self-governed organization?

Probably not if you want to believe "the original Mamo Community Council" still lives on outside of, or, is and always will be unrelated to any such entity. Then you are probably also questioning the referendum held last year:
Please note that two very respected community members were sacrificed for this.

On the other side, you could accept the fact that there simply is no way around having all our organizations departments act within a self(!)defined ruleset. MC eV Bylaws + General regulations will be the fundament and roof of all our activity and national/EU laws plus the Nokia agreement will be the walls, if you will.

Please review the diagramm that reflects the MC e.V.'s organization (final update):
http://i.imgur.com/Bv8RbSi.jpg
*1) Board may change bylaws by unanimous decision
*2) General Assembly may change bylaws by 2/3 majority
*3) General Assembly may change General Regulations incl. Council Election Rules by 2/3 majority

Please review the tmo-thread, I suggested different models:
http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=91155&page=6

legal docs:
Satzung/Bylaws: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/AMabik4zeD
Vereinsordnung/General Regulations: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/imtFYfpUKK
Vorstands-Geschäftsordnung/Board Regulations: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/uwQXMscA2n

Now what's the new situation with MC eV in place instead of HiFo?
- board consists of at least 3 instead of 5 or 7 directors
- additionally to the community (associated members), a new body, the General Meeting (regular members) is established. This is the point of contact for community to engage and show responsible or operate on communitys' behalf; democracy becomes live here.
- bylaws may not only be altered by 2/3 majority of the board, but also by 2/3 majority of the General Meeting. Since General Meeting established the bylaws, they HAVE to remain authority over them, by law.
- regular members are accepted by board upon request
- regular members only are eligible to candidate AND vote for board
- council election rules remain the same, plus
- election rules may not only be altered by community-referendum but also by 2/3 majority of the General Meeting (And I may even support an initiative that gives Council the same right directly, not only through referendum, if it's decided by General Meeting)

Why didn't we simply use HiFo bylaws for the MC eV?
Like for any other "Verein" (in the US as well as in many other countries), there HAS to be a General Meeting once a year or so, by law (HiFos only members so far are board :( ). That's the base of every association and supposedly they shall be the ultimate force since they funded the whole thing. This OTOH, excludes a major part of community (associated members) from electing and being elected for board, since accepting all ~60.000 user accounts as regular members wouldn't be an option for organizational reasons and there was consensus that this was the right way to go.

While this, from a conspirational POV, may come across as somewhat segregative, the MC eV invites and encourages everybody to participate and become regular member. The approach is to have a strong General Meeting, including all active members esp. the volunteers on all levels (board, council, techstaff, sysops, maintainers...). They may only vote for board once per year but are also free to decide whatever they agree upon by 2/3 majority anytime. Community power accumulates here, its' even superior over board and council in major regards.

Founding HiFo had the same aim to create a home for our community, but for some strange reason that attempt went terribly wrong. Please think about it, HiFo board is supposed to consist of 5 or 7 directors. 7 directors... how much more community-participation could you ask for? Probably noone understood how it should work and just believed that those guys will do all the heavy lifting anyways. But too late, HiFo very soon was perceived as an obstacle rather than a partner, basically for two reasons, SD69 seemed to appear not as cooperative or responsive as one would expect and joerg forcing the confrontation:
http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=89280

However, from this conversation on (at the latest) the partnership of Council and HiFo was poisoned, things escalated and after some sour times later, Woody finally resigned. This basically ruined HiFo since he was a spinal nerve if you will. He was a founder, held the bank account and has more knowledge about legal backgrounds in the US incl. taxes and
other obligations than anybody else (since we already scared off SD69). And I don't blame them (anymore).
Woodys' resignation:
http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=92438

But all lamenting doesn't help now, we can only draw our conclusions and help make the MC eV a success by doing better now. I have put all my efforts in the layout of MC eV's legal documents in order to provide a solid ground for our community and HiFo has spent ~500 Euro for charges and legal advise on that. Please let this money be well spent and do something good with the options at hand.

My suggestion at this point would be to hold a referendum that does the following:
- specify council duties so that it remains the major active party of community work AND honours the fact that Nokia got replaced by our own community organization, not only in regards to board
- rework council election rules incl. §6 (professional interests) and honoring the fact that Karma system is borked ATM, which results in inaccurate calculation of electorate and candidates. This may serve as an interim solution in hope of Karma system being repairable.

I mean, practically, you could also convince the General meeting to do so, given you're accepting MC eV rules; but in this particular case, a referendum may indeed be more appropriate since the change would be a major one.

I hope all this will be helpful to better understand what's going on. If any questions arise, esp. about the MC eV, please ask.

Best regards
--
Gido Griese/Win7Mac

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

First thank you for the welcome message.

Since we care of coop with different maemo entities this suggestion was debated during last council meeting...

Check the logs to make sure , and tell us if we were wrong , but note since it's summer the council was not complete :

http://mg.pov.lt/maemo-meeting-irclo...08-19.log.html

Anyway I feel we owe you an answer , let's do it here :

1/ The proposition seems to break the KISS principles so there are a few chances to have it approved in a raw, may it just proceed by iterations ?

2/ The council already has its rules , and if some of those rules are incompatible with other rules , just raise some alert , we'll consider them one after one

3/ The karma system is said to be working enough for pple to get more points and this page is open for suggestion http://wiki.maemo.org/Karma
so please community give feedback on the most important think to be fixed on this system we'll talk about it at next meetings.

4/ Since we Maemo Council represents the community, we'd like to have some feedback from maemo users in this thread to see where it could go...

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

It's still far from perfect, but I've updated the diagram again in order to hopefully come closer to following KISS principles... ;)
http://i.imgur.com/Bv8RbSi.jpg
*1) Board may change bylaws by unanimous decision
*2) General Assembly may change bylaws by 2/3 majority
*3) General Assembly may change General Regulations incl. Council Election Rules by 2/3 majority

That indeed would be great.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

My layman's view:

• Council is the democratically elected representive body of the Maemo community, and is therefore mandated to make decisions on behalf of the community. Occasionally, a decision is of such magnitude that no such mandate can be reasonably assumed. In such cases, the decision is referred to the community via a referendum.
• MC e.V is a bureaucratic/legal body that exists to satisfy certain legal requirements. Its activities should extend only to those necessary to satisfy those requirements, and additionally any activities assigned to it by the council.

Diagram:

http://s2.postimg.org/h14ots4x5/maemo_community.jpg

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

+1

ten chars

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

For a change, I like the idea, especially the General Assembly (regular members) concept. IMO, the Council and e.V surfed so far away from "general community's perception", that keeping things as proposed in marxian's diagram would just prolong the complete limbo, that we're currently in.

It seems to me, that some prominent members of Community like it as it is right now - they're jusy left in peace to do their projects, having quasi-functioning infrastructure. I think that those people don't realize that status-quo can't continue indefinitely, and that current state of things isn't "flat ground line" - it is a downhill, and left as it is, it will lead to slow death (including infrastructure, probably at the very end).
---

The only problem that I see with Win7Mac's diagram, is what we're going to do with Regular Members, that register once, and become inactive. Currently, only small promile of karma-enough users take part in voting. The sole number of votes in last council election was beyond pathetic.

Now, I'm afraid that after some time, we might end up with dozens "Regular Members" being inactive and unreachable, totally not interested in Community Affairs - leading to complete inability of making any decision via 2/3 of votes mechanism, effectively kastrating General Assembly's governing role, leading to same Council <-> e.V limbo that we're in, right now.

Solutions? I think that having small membership donation requiment (something like 3$ monthly) will keep only active members in the General Members section. 99% of uninterested users won't keep donating that, automatically dropping them into "Associated Members" group, fixing the problem.

Also, it would lead to constant-even if small - pool of money for upkeep. We can't count on free hosting forever.

/Estel

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Edit: jump there

http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php...86#post1436486

this side "active members or vote related" topic

here is a copy for the record :

{

I like the idea of engagement but I would suggest to have donated once or twice a year will validate you as an active member and with no requirement on the amount to make sure we're not losing anyone ....

Like a 0,02 EUR heartbeat each 6 months period to match the MC election and we'll asking donators to promise to vote on next election ...

Pay to vote .. I am unsure this brilliant idea will be welcomed by all :-)


And I am wondering how many "active members" will this reach ?

}

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

I think that such donation amount shouldn't be painful, but still something that would make people uninterested (or interested once a year) cancel donation, when they lose interest.

Think shopping carts in supermarket (pardon the comparison) - if we would need to put 0.01 euro there, 80% of them would be abandoned somewhere inside shop. With 1 or 2 euro, people actually care to put them back in place.

Considering the absolutely incredibly astonishing number of votes in last election vs. eligible users, i think that maemo.org Community need to be motivated quite a bit, to clean after themselves upon leaving. Recurring payment of 0.02 euro once a year may leave us with 80% of inactive General Assembly for YEARS. Two or three euro donation per month is something different, and I think that 99% of users would cancel it, upo losing interest.

Not to mention, that it's also recurring donation - most of active users are donating to Maemo anyway, this or other way.

/Estel

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

I'm against anything that even smells like 'some people are more equal than others'. The 'General Assembly' (accepted by board :/) will likely end up comprising of people who are unrepresentative of the commumity at large. I believe in one person: one vote. If any individual wants a greater level of influence, let them run for council and see if their ideas get support in the form of votes.

The current 'limbo' seems to be mostly down to personal differences, and it looks to me like the proposed changes are an attempt to place the board on an equal footing with the council, and effectively render the council surplus to requirements, since the board, with support from their chosen 'General Assembly', will be able to do pretty much whatever they want.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

That is what we have with HiFo now, that did not work out so well.

Having it this way it would be doomed to fail, decided to be the wrong type of legal entity for maemo.org in a couple of years, again. Take an example from other FOSS communities which make use of German e.V. - they organize their whole structure within, working groups dedicated to tasks with a leadership backing them with support, legally, financially and even with manpower if the tasks require it. Everything outside is first of all private and sometimes even questionable if you try to get funding by claiming to provide services to the community without being able to show a proper receipt.

The obligations within the eV need to be discussed publicly but not given lightly. Council rules are election rules, they should slightly adapt to our problems with the karma system, that a general meeting can change them is German Law and nothing one of us decided.
Please try to draw a new picture instead of trying to manipulate the colors of the current. We need to adapt to various changes in the future - a new device in demand of a working maemo infrastructure for example.

Keep in mind that there needs to be a way forward for us and not being stuck on a roundabout.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

For myself I have been here for many years until I joined. Even after joining I know I have in my odd way helped (and probably hindered equally well) new members and the community...and I'm most certainly one of the "horde" ...heck I don't think I qualify even for a vote. :D


For what my voice is worth...
I would like to say both marxian and chemist both have very good insights I agree with.
I take both and would say...the positives of both can be kept and the negatives shucked.
Marxian has it right...the fairness of : 1 voice = 1 vote is as pure as it gets to the truth of democracy proposed by the greeks.
Thereby the will of the people is truly enforced.
Sadly the after effect of having additional laws to tweak and fine tune the process end up usually destroying it.
The question is why? and how?
Frankly this is where as well I think chemist is near to being dead on the money.
1 voice = 1 vote doesn't work...yes. Why?
chemist is heading in the right direction...
1 voice =1 vote should work...marxian is correct ...it is the civil and fair way...proper way...but it essentially created a mess...why?

Here is the why and how.
and it has been stated...it's the people that get the votes that get into the positions of authority.
Some do a great job....some do nothing...some do worse.
But they were voted in.
Frankly I do believe in a pure democracy...tempered with good judgement.

Socrates believed that 1 voice = 1 vote was a recipe for disaster.
He believed that it makes no sense to hold a general vote for say ...the community dentist....or doctor...or fireman...or what ever specialist. But that is exactly what the ancient greeks did...
they voted in people who were not fit for the positions ...based purely upon votes...and always such open ended voting is coloured with personal feeling...how friendly....social ....easily swayed...corrupt....whether they were a friend...a family member...an enemy.....whatever.
Big mess.

The community should pick the best person for the job according to their talents at that job.
I understand that the karma meter here in a way acts as an automatic method of determining the most favourable candidates...
but I don't think it goes far enough.
The process isn't discriminating enough.
Hence we get some individuals in who are not what is required for the positions. Problems will always ensue.

I'm good at what I do...I would not for a second believe that I would make a good politician, lawyer or neuro-surgeon simply because I had enough votes.

To conclude ....yes I believe in 1 voice = 1 vote ....1 voice = 1 vote for the most compelling candidates whom everyone is aware that they can and will do the job competently and properly.

I'm not saying junk any part of any process that exists here.
But unless core issues are addressed all the gentle tweaking of process trying to fine tune a problem that at it's core IS the initial voting process and how candidates are chosen...it will remain a problem this community will have.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

I don't see any "equality" problems with General Members, as long as e.V is obliged to accept everyone who want to become one (and pays monthly donation). Conspiracy theories aside, please.

I would be *very* happy, if we could get rid of eternal conflict between e.V and Council. The problem with it is that e.V is actually legally responsible (and blamed, in case of failure) for stuff, while Council can push most idiotic ideas without any risk of legal consequences. But, the Council feel strong mandate due to being elected (again, paired with complete lack of real responsibility for anything, unlike e.V people), so the push their ideas. Always.

Such situation is unnacceptable in long term:

"Low" mandate + high responsibility on one side (Board)
vs.
perceived strong mandate (after all, they've got their part of the awesome number of ~80 people voting...) + 0 legal responsibility

...must lead to conflicts. Otherwise situation would be against nature ;)

/Estel

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Council will be kept where it is, a voice for the community. They represent the general mass of maemo - ok, the elections do not look like we are still alive but hey...

Only interested people of the group "general mass" will join the eV, I doubt anyone will just join for being listed and getting spammed once or twice a year...


Scenario with the MCeV in case of a dumb idea:
Council decides to go for it, it will cost an awesome amount of time, money and serverpower and will not be compensated by the project itself.
Board rejects the idea, as it might bring down maemo.org, the community funds and limited resources.
Council still thinks it is a good idea and we need to go for it, Council calls for a general meeting with "dumb idea" as action item.
Board explains why it is impossible to do atm, and General Meeting approves the idea anyway but only with limited access to current community resources. A work group "make the dumb idea possible with less resources" is born. In the meantime, council elections took place. New council has a dumb idea too, game on, again.

I did not write about a good idea, with no issues, as that is nothing the board will reject. But imagine what it would be about if there was no general meeting above board or council... 8 people would decide everything and could never be said wrong by anyone from the active members.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

I think, though, that after few years, we're going to have high percentage of people that were interested once, then lost interest and haven't opted out. Those "dead souls" would still be counted towards percentage of 2/3 voices in case General Assembly need to decide something - which, practically, would paralyze General Assembly's role.

BTW, why 2/3 votes should be required for General Assembly to push something, if it's said to be most low-level governing body? 50% +1 vote seems more reasonable for such role. 2/3 sounds like bad copy&paste from some non-direct, "representative" democracies.

/Estel

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

@estel in Denmark, if You are 3 persons, you are a "forening" foundation.
The general assembly will agree on the foundation rules and regulations, which is decided by a general majority (>50%).
Since, basically only 3 people could be presented at the general assembly, the majority would then have to be 2/3.
If less than 3 people are represented, you are per definition not a foundation, and as such you cant set the foundation regulations.

I suggest everone reads the German regulations (BGR) for founding an eV
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/index.html

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

So, for doing any decision, General Assembly will have to travel to meeting conference for voting anything? Or we could do it via on-line voting system?

If it's the latter, then I'm not sure how you're going to determine % of General Members present during voting. If it's the former, I'm *absolutely* sure, that we're going to get awesome number of voters ;) In fact, your example about 3 people present may be just spot-on.

/Estel

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

@estel,
Yes, there are hurdles to evercome still, this is for sure.
Practically, it is assumed 'normal' that active members are physicalky present, in our case, well not so practical. However, if the board (and council) members show up, that would be ok - not perfect.
If online (I believe thats how it will be) we have to figure out how to count active members.
It will be hard work either way, and very likely we wont make every member happy.
I do see some good benefits in actually becoming a community of active members with stronger regulations. At the end I believe, if we succeed, we will become a strong community which will also be heard better by for example vendors.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

I absolutely agree here, thus the point (and pressure) on ensuring, that general assembly is keep clean of inactive people, while still being completely open and welcoming for anyone willing to be part of it, from any place in world.

Monthly token donation requiment would work here, I think - although, if you (Board/Council) have better ideas, then even better. Looking forward to discuss them :)

/Estel

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Meetings will be online, this reminds me that we need to add the requirement for a registered freenode account to apply. If the general assembly is not able to vote on things it could be pushed to our voting engine, I have to re-read bylaws on that - could be that we need to change something to have a 2/3 need to be able to vote and active vote needs to be a 2/3 majority. With the voting engine that would mean 100% are able to vote but if only 30 people vote, 20 "aye"s could be enough.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

There is one simple problem with this approach: Those involved in the e.V. (like those in HiFo) take on legal liability. Where do you propose to find people willing to take on legal liability, while having no voice in that discussion? You won't, which is why we have, as Estel puts it:

Reality is before HiFo, the diagram was more like this:

Community > Council | NOKIA

You'll note that Nokia didn't see Council as its controller or its equal. It did what it legally needed to as a company, and paid just enough attention to keep the fire-ants from swarming. The e.V. needs to exist in a similar fashion. It should, of course, listen to and try to do what the community desires. But at times it must take actions to keep itself (and in as much, the community) healthy. (Including things like negotiating contract terms for taking on trademark licenses...) It also must uphold the legal responsibilities (and liabilities) it needs to take on to keep the lights on for the community.

If you have a direct control mechanism, where Council can say "do X now", where X is damaging or legally risky to those legally responsible, who would take such a position? That is, in fact the major reason I left. I felt that others were preparing to take actions that HiFo Board members could be held legally culpable for and did not want to wind up fined or in jail.

Agreed. In fact, I've agreed with every post you've made so far in this thread, which frightens the hell out of me. When we both agree on something, it's a rare and dangerous thing. FWIW: That death is not quite as slow, or as far away, as you may think it is.

Agreed. There needs to be a time-out mechanism. This is the reason many e.V. (and non-profits) that have a membership have an annual dues.

I propose another option: To enlist, one must contribute a small amount (say 1€). The host (e.V.) must hold a poll or election at least twice per year, announced at least a month ahead of time, and lasting at least one week. Non-participation in 2 consecutive polls/elections knocks you out of the general electorate. One may buy their way back in via another contribution. This allays any concern about those lacking funds, allows 1 person 1 vote, and still gives a way to shed inactive members.

I'm sure we could incorporate something like that into the rules, if we word it correctly. Right now though, we need to get things setup and transferred so the legal entity can move forward. The proposed method isn't perfect, but as noted it is how many German groups already operate. It's far easier in this case to tweak things post-setup than it is to demand perfection from the start.

Just my 2 cents...

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Our webpage is maemo.org and you are MC eV too... ;)
For now it seems we have to live with existing tmo-threads in Community subforum.
For actual status of board(s) please see: [Board] Updates on HiFo & MC e.V.


...that appeared out of nowhere that tries to subjugate council and community ... ;)


Because it's not written in some ancient wiki-page? Does that also strictly exclude Council from participating?
How does demanding Council > MC eV while refusing to contribute and cooperate during establishing period fit together?
Not your business and not your damn duty, right?


This tells a lot, sadly... You voted on all three of them. For those who weren't present during MC eV kickoff-meeting or didn't read the Meeting Minutes, here's the link.

So why the sabotage, joerg_rw?
Your ranting against any kind of foundation has quite a history but doesn't help now. You very well know there's no eV without a general meeting, so please share some arguments or shut up.
MC eV bylaws and general regulations are set know, but are subject to change* any time**. It's a starting point, do something with it or leave it.

* by 2/3 majority of valid votes in general meeting
** general regulations cover major parts of how the eV operates and are easy to change, change of bylaws requires acknowledgment by court which likely takes a few weeks.

Best regards

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

I simply refuse to comment this pile of polemic, insult and idiocy
[edit] shouldn't you try quitting your current profession and rather do one of those fortuneteller hotlines? You seem to know way better than I what I think and what I said and what I meant with what I allegedly said (I actually never did). Ideal preconditions for a professional success story on such hotline.

I shanghaied you for HiFo once. Sorry I did. But this didn't assign a mission to you to restructure complete maemo community. Literally everybody told you you're terribly mistaken on your ideas what's HiFo and what's council. That's not only me telling you.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Side note:

Some moderator deleted/moved posts without leaving a note, AGAIN? Win7Mac's post quotes joerg's part from a completely different thread. For sure, it doesn't help to maintain communication. Appeal to moderators - really, REALLY, mark things you've done in original threads, please.

Actual on-topic:

Before this thread deteriorates into another (all too-well-known) "joerg against the world" 30-pages, could we get some roadmap of what will be done, and when? Possible obstacles/blockers, assuming that "some" people will try to sabotage? When period of consulting with community ends, and the part of actually pushing with changes starts?

/Estel

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

No, you got that completely wrong. It obviously been win7mac himself who did that.
I however sympathize with the rest of your criticism. The spreading/splitting across several threads is not helpful, and actually happened too often already in the way you assumed it had.

where from is that? Another thing you made up?Sabotage? Now two fools meet in this thread? The only "sabotage" I can see is constant trolling and provocation by spreading nonsense and barking commands at other people to do on their behalf what was originally a genuine duty of themselves, by "some" people (Not me!)

Wasn't it you who started first and loudest to moan about power grab of HiFo, back when it got established? Recently I've actually been tempted to quote you on this and say "Estel knew it", but then I don't see a general power grab, only one HiFo member doing his thing and then thinking that everything (incl council) has to adapt (even to a point of ignoring the "holy council rules") to match into the new shiny world invented by him, just because "there's no eV without a general meeting" and now that general meeting doesn't match with council rules despite win7mac explicitly and repeatedly confirmed that e.V rules are ONE HUNDRED PERCENT compatible with ALL council rules, which been the explicit goal of setting up the e.V bylaws. Now when council insists in adhering to the rules we got elected for and by and refuses to ingore/bend/cripple them to obey win7mac's command, we are sabotaging? How smart a point of view!
Also didn't you notice the sneaky twist to move voting rights away from what been called the maemo community so far and clearly defined in council rules as "electorate" towards only those users who register as MCeV members, where an elitist group of MCeV hats (yes, I'm probably even one of them, though I really didn't bother to read all the details in the bylaws) can decide who gets accepted as member and who not? And win7mac calls this "an inprovement in democracy for maemo". Only a sidenote being that MCeV is not even meant to decide anything relevant, neither in any general assembly nor by regular or ordinary or whatever members - since MCeV as HiFo's successor is exactly what HiFo been: community's cashier, not anything more. Despite win7mac thinks this must change.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

See attached for proof...

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

You're walkin on very thin ice there...
If we still had a Nokia Community Manager, you never would have made it as councilor... And you know it ;)
Another proof that our statutes need reformation.

All good.


Look, MC eV rules are set, it is what it is. If you don't like it, change it if you can get a majority, no problem.
This thread was meant to find a consensus, basically with YOU, since you're THE ONLY ONE so far who refused to accept MC eV for what it is:
It is not the Cashier only, as much as that would be wishful for some reason or not. It is OUR organization and the operator of this site, with all legal consequences.

That may be true or not, fact is that we NEED to grab power ourselves. We just need to figure out how to do it in a way that community appreciates it. That was the intent of this thread.

I just found this totally unrelated post on tmo, but it fits so much to what I think that I simply quote it here:
Best regards

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

and what makes you think that's a correct statement? Or is this already another planned insult ? Like so many you already drafted against me
AHA! No Sir, I don't!
Safe your smilies, they make this even sneakier
Another instance where you demonstrate your disrespect of democratically legitimately elected council and the community / electorate who elected that council. Another proof that OUR (council's) rules are perfect and neither you nor HiFo or MCeV will change them in any other way than going via referendum, no matter how many evil plots you draft to change stuff so it fits your idea about "democracy" and "new guidance". [to be continued after next quote}

Look, you simply don't get it that MCeV rules are not binding resp of lower relevance to maemo council than maemo council rules, that *you* cannot change the latter no matter how hard you try to define new MCeV rules as superior, and finally you fail to understand that I don't care about MCeV rules exactly for that very reason.
It is YOUR organization, it seems, and you want to make sure it overrides all previously existing maemo organizational structures, despite it's *clearly* only the successor of HiFo which itself been only the cashier of maemo community. And it's not only me who told you that your insisting in HiFo or MCeV being more than that is a big misconception on your side. Basically everybody who commented on it so far told you that you're wrong on that. I'm maybe the only one who's not fed up with all this yet and still takes you serious and still bothers answering your messy statements and polemics, in the hope that one day you will realize and admit that there's nothing not made up by yourself to base your claim about "MCeV is more than cashier" on.
HUH WHAT? You telling the truth for once and showing your true motives? You'll fail on such moving authority away from council and to whatever you call your baby you want to crown for new emperor of maemo. HiFo (and any MCeV) is meant to steward the assets and execute what community decided and told council, and council tells the cashier, and cashier obeys (unless request is illegal). No matter what your shiny new bylaws say. YOU invented them. Nobody instructed you to do so. Nobody gave authorization to your weird interpretation of how things are supposed to be. You're rapidly approaching a point where council MUST declare any such move of assets from HiFo to any new entity with bylaws of *your* liking as an ILLEGAL act.
I'd like to hear an official word from HiFo if all this is HiFo's official take on this, or just win7mac's private pipedream. win7mac happily continues damaging/destroying council here and claiming that council is obsolete and must get replaced by a MCeV. I want to hear DEFINITELY if this is the official HiFo notion or not.
quoting unrelated posts, pathetic.

BR
jOERG
councilor

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Yay! I got quoted!

Back to lurking...

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

This has gone too far, please see my announcement here.

http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php...57#post1437957

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Out of curiosity, why finding consensus with said person is even necessary? Not that I'm against consensus or mediation, but history has proven - since any attempts to mediate between him and SD69 - that it's a pure waste of time. I remember trying to mediate myself, and all concern joerg ever had was that I might be "running the show, now". Presumably, stealing from him ;) Really, that person lives in completely different realm of existence. Don't bother.

If consensus with joerg as a must, then we can already pack things and turn lights out. Otherwise, if indeed he is the only one trying to block things in the Board/Council, just push changes over him via majority of votes, please. The sooner that person is kept away from any organizational things related to Maemo, the bigger chance for survival of Community, in any form.

Back to my question from last post:
Any roadmap with dates of changes being applied/voting dates, etc? I hope we're talking about real changes with realistic deadlines, not just getting another topic to prove who is responsible for the mess. We know the latter, already, now it's time to move on.

/Estel

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

This is one of the most rightly posts I have seen, expect from win7mac trying to elaborate on what is needed.

I didnt want to post anything to ignite a fire here, as I believe this is something that needs to be sorted out in board and council meetings.
Yes, Joerg is a valuable asset, and actions that would take him out of his imaginary dream position, will make him leave, and obviously appear again.
But, it is damaging to the future of this community, and honestly, any 'normal' company would have eliminated the poisin before it came this far. Nobody is that important that a company cant live without him, but one person can mean the dead of a company.

I think win7mac have stressed the necessary actions needed, as well as what is required - by law - to form the necessary verein (eV).

It is not as simple as Joerg wants it to be, the eV is a legally responsible organ, and people can be put to prison if wrong decisions are made.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

In whatever dimension "that person" is living , he has been elected by community so I guess your words are also harming the voters ... not that I am against freedom of speech ... but this is not making council job easier...

We "lost" one valuable member today so please help to sort out this situation and please avoid to throw oil in the fire ...

In other words be constructive or ignored ....

So to move on . a short description of MC eV is welcome on Wiki ... does this sound good for a start ?

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Prison? Seriously. What are you doing on these meetings?

I don't understand what's going on in this thread. What's going on here. Is it a power struggle or a real issue? If so what is the issue?

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Not anything that would put anyone to prison, yet.
But, being a legally registered entity (verein) involves a risk of (worst case) being sentenced to jail, yes indeed.
There are many responsibilities for the board of an eV, one is the consequence of doing something illegal - an example could perhaps be if TMO is distributing pirated software.

Dont take this easy

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

While your statement is true, so is mine. One persons acts can be fatal.

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Then, I would use a different strategy for a such goal ... this is making the whole thing more confuse every day ... to my eyes at least, am I the only one who does not see the direction of light in this tunnel ?

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

No one is saying that joerg's mandate is invalid. He got voted in, so he have one vote in the body he was elected for - that's fine. Just outvote him, and get over it - decisions by majority of votes were inventedd for a purpose. Like, exactly such situations.

Still seing any "harming the voters" here? I don't.

/Estel

Re: Open letter: Community, Council, Board and the MC eV
 

Sure:
[Board] Updates on HiFo & MC e.V.