handaxe, all that's going on here *is* *exactly* about what you suggested we should target instead.

[edit] btw I find the term "governance" absolutely inappropriate. There is no governance of maemo community, just entities that *serve*, me and techstaff one of them, council incl me another one, and HiFo BoD a third one. If you want to understand anything of what's going on here, or you are just worried about techstaff maybe not being able to continue the brilliant work they did so far to deliver this forum as well as all the other maemo.org infra services on a high quality and availablity level for you, then you *need* to get a bit more involved in what we're discussing or arguing about here.
/j

Been waiting for Jagielski to weigh in for scheduling the Board meeting, like in the last Board, I often waited for Board Chairman Samoff to schedule a meeting. Look at my actual record of attending Board and Council meetings instead of some misleading innuendo and you will see it is very good. I acted within 7 days to find and appoint two qualified Directors so that the Foundation could proceed. Of course that bit of contribution was twisted into a negative with complaints that there should be a special election of the Board seats vacated by Samoff and Galvez instead of the appointments, which complaints have been a terrible distraction and waste of time, and then the same people turn around and complain that the Board of appointees (who they complained should defer to Directors elected in special elections in the future) haven't done anything yet. I asked Jagielski in good faith to help out and he agreed. But I wouldn't be surprised if he is looking at the scene and he might resign too.

Joerg's post is full of half-truths and misplaced blame. If I try to squeeze in the time to respond and to correct everything, it's a half-response and just more grist for the toxic mill. And this negative politics and dysfunction is going on continuously, all starting pretty much from the day Joerg showed up on council election scene. It's a terribly destructive approach - throwing out so much negativity and mud so often that some of it eventually sticks in the minds of some people.

I really don't know what to say, other than state that I'm feeling disgusted.

Attending council meetings? What? One of them? I'm feeling flattered we had the opportunity to have your highness attend.

For the record, the only board member who has regularly attended council meetings is Woody.

And no, Joerg's post is not full of half truths and misplaced blame.

The meetings of the council when I was a member.

Guys, please. At this point, it's not about whose fail it is - it will be unpopular conclusion with many, but I'm perfectly sure, that everyone involved in organizing Maemo (myself included) have certain amount of fail in own activity records, even "community heroes" (no irony meant, in naming).

At this stage, it's about "unite and work together" in order to survive. Pretty, pretty please - lets put freakin' bloody' tight red line here:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...and start cooperation with carte blanche. If one would ask me, how to define Maemo philosophy in one sentence, it would be... Hard question But, for me, the closest thing for that is:

"People mean well"

So, now, pretty please, everyone, lets assume that all people writing here, are meaning well. It's just a request from me, call it personal one, if you want.

Now, pretty please, could tech staff head write (again, I know, but it doesn't matter now) what actions (from legal entity) are required now, in, lets say, three blocks:
1. urgent
2. soon-to-be-urgent
3. required in long term

...and Board member(s) reply to all points, explaining what steps are/could be made immediately to fullfil those points, and, if appropriate, why some of them can't be made for legal reasons, and why? Then, propose solutions to make it legally doable.

Now, very important thing - please, write all of the above in strictly informative manner, without any single ironic comment, accusation, or regret. For a while, we're becoming CPU's given certain task, OK?
---

Same apply for election. I think that it's pretty clear, that Community want election, and it should take place for this and other (time limit, etc) reasons. SD69 was doing legal work around HiFo for a reason - please, write (in same, informative matter) what is exactly required to have this election legally appropriate for Hildon Foundation, how passing responsibilities should look, etc.
---

I'm perfectly sure, that we can handle this, if we hit "hard reset" now, and start cooperating from scratch, Otherwise, critical mass may get "achieved", with catastrophic (for community) chain reaction as consequence.

/Estel

There is already an official update from Hildon Foundation. We possibly can do an election for the Hildon Foundation Council at the same time as Maemo Community Council. There can be a hard reset of election rules for Hildon Foundation Council. There can't be a hard reset of Maemo Community Council rules (except by referendum) as we've agreed with Nokia to keep the Maemo Community Council intact.

"official update from Hildon Foundation..."
you're adressing community and council that way?

Also, this discussion is not about Jim and should be held in this thread, at least it would be on topic there...

It seems to be, that in general understanding, Hildon Foundation Council was to replace Maemo Community Council. I understand, that in your (as a lawyer) opinion, bylaws doesn't state that, so we have intention<->results errors.

How could it be handled in a way that Community expects (one Board and one Council), without breaking bylaws? Could it be workarounded by having same candidates for Maemo Community Council and Hildon Foundation Council with (hopefully) same people elected for both Council bodies?

Then, referendum on fix for bylaws (that would patch this mess with two councils) could be held.

Another possible scenario - electing Hildon Foundation Council, and 0 candidates for Maemo Community Council. Would it result in disbanding Maemo Community Council, and be followed by same referendum for updating Hildon Foundation Bylaws?
---

Note about the above - I'm asking about purely legal point of view. I know such "legal dance" may sound ridiculous, but I understand that SD69 - as a lawyer, and one of people responsible legally for Foundation's respect for law - may want to follow bylaws to the letter, not willing to respect "intentional spirit" (legally hard to prove, in case of troubles).

If I understand SD69's correctly, he haven't said that he like the dual-council thing - he is just stating how, in his opinion, our bylaws work in terms of law appropriate to Foundation.

If that's correct, then we have messed up bylaws. It doesn't matter whose fail it is at this point (not to mention, that bylaws were available for everyone to review for quite long time), the thing is how to fix this mess in most effective way.
---

another disclaimer - I'm not telling that I agree (or disagree) - with SD69's or Hildon Foundation's view on things - I'm just trying to fairly state point's presented, to allow civil and free-of-flamewars discussion between interested parties (current Council and HiFo).

Call it "volunteer moderation of discussion", if you want - keeping in mind, that it will work only as long, as everyone involved accept the idea I've presented in my last post (stating points in strictly informative manner, without any negative emotional attachments, and assuming that "People mean well"). If, for some reason, both or one of interested parties isn't interested in that attempt to rebuild cooperation, I will humbly hide where I came from

Still, i think that, lately, for some reasons, we've lost ability to even *talk* with each other at cooperative level about Board<->Council things, so I strongly encourage to, at least, try that "hard reset of attitude".
---

At this point, I would like to thank SD60 for answering exactly as I've requested (informatively, without accusations or blaming anyone). I've talked with joerg_rw (if I'm not wrong, head of tech staff), trying to encourage him into doing the same - I hope he will decide it's worth trying, too.

/Estel

// Edit to the above
Win7Mac, please, no flaming. "Update from Board" is regular way of official announcements in any Foundation managed by Boards. Keep in mind, that I haven't even seen its content - I just mean that there is nothing wrong in naming here, or using it as a way to announce Board's decisions.

Lets not discuss about form or things from the past (which doesn't lead anywhere), but stick to the merit and things we can do in $future_from_now, OK?

Also, I don't think it's so important in which Board<->Council thread civil discussion will happen, as long, as it happens at all. This thread seems to be most active, so I proposed it here. If TMO moderators feel like splitting topics, lets leave it to their discretion.

Dear Community,

SD69 is just playing with words twisting them beyond the point of recognition to support his opinion. The unfortunate fact is that we fell for it and fed him with more words to twist. I'll change the tune now, I hope it's not too late to appeal to your intelligence and ability to judge.

On a meeting back when SD69 wasn't even a HiFo board director, the board decided to appoint the council. Do you really believe that they appointed the Maemo Community Council to do it's regular job? Or that by a slip of the hand of the meetong minutes author the term Hildon Foundation Council was omitted, and HiFo as it should, and as was way more logical, appointed a HiFo council early on, which was incidentally (what would be better?) the fresh MCC?


Now on the word appoint, what do you think? That the bylaws have the 7 day clause just for the sake of the rule? Or to ensure that the Foundation doesn't remain directorless for long? If Mr. Bauer's explanation is indeed right then he could have appointed Pope Francis as Diector and no further action would be required. Is this likely to be the spirit of that clause? Is this a foundation you want serving maemo.org?


Lastly, on elections. What do you think is the purpose of the clause that allows either body to cause elections for both bodies? Do you think that our call for elections for both bodies serves the spirit of that clause even if we (according to Mr. Bauer) are not the HiFo Council, especially when the general gist of the community member's comments AND the explicit opinion of 2/3 of the board directors is in favor of elections? Do you think it is an unofficial act, or that the board should take it seriously and call it's own elections anyway saving us all from the discussion and delays?


Thank you for reading,

Michael Demetriou,
council member

You just won't be content, will you? I could have appointed no one and continued on as the only Director while special elections languished (because there is no working election process in place). That would have been bad. So instead I appointed two people, including the one requested by Ivan and Maemo Community Council. And then you turn around and complain that I made the appointments... Please move on.