Hey, On 04.09.2018 12:38, Richard Brown wrote:
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 at 12:05, Henne Vogelsang <hvogel@opensuse.org> wrote:
Richard, when you where appointed by SUSE as the chairman of the openSUSE board, you joined a community of people who work as a team.
As you well know, I was part of that community long before my involvement in it's Board, as both an elected member and then it's Chairman.
I feel your dismissal of that undermines your points below regarding our guiding principles, especially those relating to "respect for others and their work"
I'm glad you got my point. Doesn't feel too good to get talked to in such a dismissive tone, doesn't it? Maybe you shouldn't think about that only on the receiving end...
And I believe throughout this thread I have shown a repeated effort to listen and understand.
I fear, this got lost, for me at least, when you keep repeating in your emails that everything will turn into a "reality drama", "childish popularity contest" and that "the Board's ability to function in the roles it exists for will be grossly undermined", if "many of your views ... gained acceptance" Maybe I'm a bit too sensitive. Everything you say afterward feels like the part of the sentence before the "but". I like you, but...
Of course there is significant amount of grey areas, and this discussion has most certainly helped evolve my position. I wouldn't describe my current views as simple black and white
Awesome, let's talk about that!
"I have no problem with the diversity of thought among the Board being public knowledge, but I do have a problem when that transitions from sharing the fact the board contains more than one opinion, to Board members publicly undermining the decision made by the collective whole group."
So how do you imagine board members can make their diverse thoughts public knowledge without undermining the decision made by the collective? Of the recent example, what would you wish would have been done differently?
"As a Board we could share both the majority and minority views on any decisions."
Sounds good. How do you imagine this would look like? Just the votes or a written "minority report" that summarizes the discussion? I guess this could turn into much work for you peepz. Previous boards had public meetings where you could listen in or see a log and see how a decision was reached, that would be one way to know what's going on.
"I'm happy to take from this lesson the collective decision that the Board will make less decisions and I will support any effort in the Board to push back from requests for it to make decisions and instead encourage more public debate and public decision making."
Which are the recent decisions you think you should have pushed back? How many percent do you guess would get off your plate? And another thought, don't you think that defining the boards body of work so narrow on conflict resolution would take something away from the project? I mean yes if there are "existing governance structures" everything is fine and dandy but what if there aren't? Or are there no such decisions currently in your opinion? Henne -- Henne Vogelsang http://www.opensuse.org Everybody has a plan, until they get hit. - Mike Tyson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org