Active Topics
-
Is there a section to talk about Java ME? Apps, etc. (0)
to General by Kalatti - 2 days, 23 hrs ago -
Extra softwares in Sailfish using CLI, repositories, etc (117)
to SailfishOS by nieldk - 4 days, 20 hrs ago -
Firefox with Leste (6)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 5 days, 17 hrs ago - more...
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Wikiwide For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2015-01-04
, 21:14
|
|
Community Council |
Posts: 664 |
Thanked: 1,648 times |
Joined on Apr 2012
@ Hamburg
|
#252
|
Originally Posted by Wikiwide
Yes. I mentioned this because that wiki page states so. It was established there in 2009 afaik.
Except, wasn't Council responsible for hiring maemo.org staff, in the past?
http://wiki.maemo.org/Community_Council#Council_work
But if "hiring" implies contractual agreements, that needs to be considered as business activity.
Shanghaiing volunteers for certain tasks is a different thing of course, unless these task imply legal responsibility within themself, like e.g. for a tax adviser.
__________________
Nokia 5110 > 3310 > 6230 > N70 > N9 BLACK 64GB
Hildon Foundation Board member
Maemo Community e.V. co-creator, founder and director since Q4/2016
Current Maemo Community Council member
Nokia 5110 > 3310 > 6230 > N70 > N9 BLACK 64GB
Hildon Foundation Board member
Maemo Community e.V. co-creator, founder and director since Q4/2016
Current Maemo Community Council member
| The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Win7Mac For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2015-01-04
, 21:19
|
|
Community Council |
Posts: 4,920 |
Thanked: 12,867 times |
Joined on May 2012
@ Southerrn Finland
|
#253
|
Currently all techstaff are volunteers, not payed staff so indeed it has been more the tradition to shanghaij people in it...
| The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to juiceme For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2015-01-04
, 22:08
|
|
Posts: 1,994 |
Thanked: 3,342 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ N900: Battery low. N950: torx 4 re-used once and fine; SIM port torn apart
|
#254
|
Quick reply...
Besides, it should be possible for Council to shanghaij volunteers for maemo.org, and for Board to sign contracts with them, if necessary?
Thank you. Best wishes.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Per aspera ad astra...
Besides, it should be possible for Council to shanghaij volunteers for maemo.org, and for Board to sign contracts with them, if necessary?
Thank you. Best wishes.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Per aspera ad astra...
|
|
2015-01-05
, 07:04
|
|
Posts: 51 |
Thanked: 260 times |
Joined on Sep 2010
|
#255
|
Originally Posted by Wikiwide
Because eV-active-members aka General-Assembly sound like "elite" of *.maemo.org members, 'selected' by chaotic self-nomination?
Because GA has power over Board, and nobody has power over GA?
Because there is no clearly defined mutual-control between Board and Council, when re-election of one would automatically mean re-election of the other, at the same time?
By the way, why "articles of association" can be changed by either Board or GA? Shouldn't it be Council or GA, then, since Board is to execute rulings of GA and Council?
It's just plenty of confusion. While Board and Council are familiar concepts, GA is not.
Best wishes. Thank you.
in my view, the "General-Assembly" is intended to be the community but in reality will be whoever has an interest in the continued running of *.maemo.org,
"the community"* controls the GA, if you are worried they are pushing things in the wrong direction then you need to become an active member and push back. it is intentionally a slow process to allow malicious moves to be blocked by simple majority rules. this is in-fact my biggest problem with council as it is now, it has a rapid cycle for "orders to board", and has no equally fast way for community to block them.
*with membership limitations that are intended to prevent abuse.
 |
|
2015-01-07
, 02:00
|
|
Posts: 1,455 |
Thanked: 3,309 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Rochester, NY
|
#256
|
Originally Posted by gerbick
There-in lies the root of the problem. Just as Watts=Volts*Amps, Power = Choice/Liability. To have separation of (or sharing of) power, one must also have separation/sharing of liability. That doesn't exist in any way right now.
So... is there a three sentence answer to the Maemo Community, GA and eV question in regards to separation?
Not as to who they are, but the separation and powers therein.
Separation of powers works in government because each branch has limited power over the next. That power includes both choice and liability. If there were no repercussions for one branch taking the other out, it would happen all the time. (And in some countries where that's true, it does happen, regularly.) When either component approaches 0, you're in a world of hurt.
Right now, Board holds all the liability, and most of the "choice". The demand is that choice be given to GA, or Council, or tech staff, or some other body, which has no ability to take on legal liability. The concern is that if that happens, nobody will want to be on Board (or e.V., or whatever form the legal liability holders take).
Ultimately, the community can decide what it wants. But reality is if you setup a system where those expected to take on risk and liability have little to no say in what that risk level is, you won't get many (or any) takers, and the whole project will fail. That's the razor edge we've been traveling for the past two years or so now, and why turn over in HiFo was as rampant as it was. (And in part, why I left.)
__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
| The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2015-01-07
, 23:48
|
|
Posts: 1,994 |
Thanked: 3,342 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ N900: Battery low. N950: torx 4 re-used once and fine; SIM port torn apart
|
#257
|
Originally Posted by woody14619
Quick reply...
There-in lies the root of the problem. Just as Watts=Volts*Amps, Power = Choice/Liability. To have separation of (or sharing of) power, one must also have separation/sharing of liability. That doesn't exist in any way right now.
Separation of powers works in government because each branch has limited power over the next. That power includes both choice and liability. If there were no repercussions for one branch taking the other out, it would happen all the time. (And in some countries where that's true, it does happen, regularly.) When either component approaches 0, you're in a world of hurt.
Right now, Board holds all the liability, and most of the "choice". The demand is that choice be given to GA, or Council, or tech staff, or some other body, which has no ability to take on legal liability. The concern is that if that happens, nobody will want to be on Board (or e.V., or whatever form the legal liability holders take).
Ultimately, the community can decide what it wants. But reality is if you setup a system where those expected to take on risk and liability have little to no say in what that risk level is, you won't get many (or any) takers, and the whole project will fail. That's the razor edge we've been traveling for the past two years or so now, and why turn over in HiFo was as rampant as it was. (And in part, why I left.)
So are you saying that elected Members of Parliament should worry more about the risks and liabilities than about the goals and wishes set in front of them by the electorate?..
I wish I could know examples of sharp situations where Council was trying to get Board to do something risky.... Because I do not recall a razor edge - I only see slow movements, and attempts to keep everything afloat, neither sinking nor trailing behind.
Best wishes.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Per aspera ad astra...
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Wikiwide For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2015-01-08
, 10:15
|
|
Posts: 5,028 |
Thanked: 8,613 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#258
|
Originally Posted by Wikiwide
Members of the Parliament have legal responsibility for what they do, where Council members doesn't have any (nor can have, even if they wanted to). Board DO have legal responsibility.
So are you saying that elected Members of Parliament should worry more about the risks and liabilities than about the goals and wishes set in front of them by the electorate?..
Council is not Parliament - it is volunteer team keeping streets and toilets clean, if you pardon the comparison. No legal risk, yet the same (aka 0) power The pompous name "Council" is one of the reasons why people still miss this basic truth, and one of the reason why I think we should rid of this "legacy"' altogether.
Originally Posted by Wikiwide
I wish I could know examples of sharp situations where Council was trying to get Board to do something risky....
You have been sitting under the rock for last two years? Ask juiceme, he will have some "nice" stories for you. For a "teaser" - from top of my head - "infamous" joerg tried to force Board into using his unreliable hosting service and pay for it, when reliable and FREE alternative was present./Estel
__________________
N900's aluminum backcover / body replacement
-
N900's HDMI-Out
-
Camera cover MOD
-
Measure battery's real capacity on-device
-
TrueCrypt 7.1 | ereswap | bnf
-
Hardware's mods research is costly. To support my work, please consider donating. Thank You!
N900's aluminum backcover / body replacement
-
N900's HDMI-Out
-
Camera cover MOD
-
Measure battery's real capacity on-device
-
TrueCrypt 7.1 | ereswap | bnf
-
Hardware's mods research is costly. To support my work, please consider donating. Thank You!
| The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Estel For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2015-01-08
, 13:41
|
|
Administrator |
Posts: 1,036 |
Thanked: 2,019 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ Germany
|
#259
|
In short:
GA is the ultimate power, as long as it is legal, following the bylaws and has funding (for cases needed).
Board can throw over or return to discussion with GA when things seem off, legally or missing funding or not in line with the bylaws.
Board can act on their own and as long as GA agrees proceed, GA can block board decisions and revert them.
Council has no powers but those explicitly handed to it (that is more responsibilities than real power) and a voice in discussions.
Maemo Community is all of us - in general referred to as garage accounts - they vote for Council
GA is the (in our case) annual meeting of all members of the MCeV
MCeV is a registered at court entity representing Maemo and its community (when HiFo finally disappears). It consists of a Board voted by the GA and a Council voted by the maemo community (garage.mo) and of course of the members and founders of the MCeV itself.
So separation is [MCeV(Board,Council,GA,Members)] != [Maemo Community(garage,Council)] while they share the same council. Garage accounts are mentioned in the bylaws as party to elect the council.
Last edited by chemist; 2015-01-08 at 13:49.
GA is the ultimate power, as long as it is legal, following the bylaws and has funding (for cases needed).
Board can throw over or return to discussion with GA when things seem off, legally or missing funding or not in line with the bylaws.
Board can act on their own and as long as GA agrees proceed, GA can block board decisions and revert them.
Council has no powers but those explicitly handed to it (that is more responsibilities than real power) and a voice in discussions.
Maemo Community is all of us - in general referred to as garage accounts - they vote for Council
GA is the (in our case) annual meeting of all members of the MCeV
MCeV is a registered at court entity representing Maemo and its community (when HiFo finally disappears). It consists of a Board voted by the GA and a Council voted by the maemo community (garage.mo) and of course of the members and founders of the MCeV itself.
So separation is [MCeV(Board,Council,GA,Members)] != [Maemo Community(garage,Council)] while they share the same council. Garage accounts are mentioned in the bylaws as party to elect the council.
__________________
useful links for newcomers: New members say hello, New users start here, Community subforum, Beginners' wiki page, Maemo5 101, FAQ
useful links for newcomers: New members say hello, New users start here, Community subforum, Beginners' wiki page, Maemo5 101, FAQ
Last edited by chemist; 2015-01-08 at 13:49.
| The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to chemist For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2015-01-08
, 18:49
|
|
Posts: 1,455 |
Thanked: 3,309 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Rochester, NY
|
#260
|
Originally Posted by Wikiwide
I'm saying anyone who blindly takes on legal liability, while giving over the right to control that liability, is not someone you want in the role of Board member.
So are you saying that elected Members of Parliament should worry more about the risks and liabilities than about the goals and wishes set in front of them by the electorate?
Board != Parliament. The Board is not about making rules or laws; it's about keeping things running and benefiting the community. It's more of a head of state, if anything. Do you really want an executive that doesn't consider risks and liabilities in the actions taken on behalf of the electorate?
On the risk front: before I left there had already been at least three instances of Council and/or "community" pushing for items and actions that were in a legally grey (heading toward illegal) area. Meaning that had those requests/demands been followed through (and/or discovered by the wrong parties later) it could have seen Board members in a situation of being liable for legal prosecution. Each push-back from the Board against these items was seen on TMO and/or IRC as said pusher(s) exploding about how the Board was:
- usurping their authority.
- taking over everything.
- destroying/selling-out the community.
- negotiating away our legal rights to do X, Y, and/or Z.
- spreading lies/slander to further their own "agenda".*
*An agenda that they then could not describe the basis of or reasoning for other than members "controlling" the community in some way.
Again, there is a reason there's been a high level of turn-over on the Board. Most people don't want to risk the assets they've put their lifes work into over a social group. With under $4K in the coffers, who will pay for legal defense of Board members if a lawsuit occurs? Most also don't want to spend time and/or personal funds defending themselves in a court over a legal misstep that someone else took against their wishes.
Giving any form of "final say" to anyone other than those holding legal liability will result in no one of intelligence taking on those positions. If you do snag someone into taking on the role while not understanding the risk, they'll flee as soon as they figure out what they've gotten themselves into. Neither scenario lends itself to a stable Board or community.
The fact that some people either can't understand this, or deny the fact that this is legally the situation, is baffling to me.
__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
Last edited by woody14619; 2015-01-08 at 18:57. Reason: updated to include another "reason"
| The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
| Tags |
| discussion, legal body |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:49.
Except, wasn't Council responsible for hiring maemo.org staff, in the past?
http://wiki.maemo.org/Community_Council#Council_work
Best wishes. Thank you.