On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 at 22:47, Jim Henderson firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Richard, you know that I trust the board. But that said, there's a question of accountability - "trust, but verify" is important for the membership to know that the board is doing what they were elected to do.
In order to make an informed decision when someone runs for a second term on the board, how is anyone to know that the person they're voting for is representing their interests if the decisions they make (or votes they cast) aren't open to public review?
The same information that you had and have to vote on any other Board member candidate in the project.
Board Membership should not be the sole contribution that any individual makes to the Project
Their should be plenty of other examples regarding existing Board members opinions, work ethic, and other factors to help anyone assist where to put their votes, just as their is for when voting for new Board members.
We have our strict 2 term limit for many reasons, but I understand one of them was the assumption that the Board will be voting in private.
While talking about such rules, it's also worth pointing out the Project's right to recall a Board.
There is no provision in our rules for the Project to call for the resignation or removal of a single Board member.
But there IS a provision for the entire Board to be re-elected. The threshold for this is currently if 20% of the Membership call for it. https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Board_election_rules
This rule and the very low threshold for recall only makes sense BECAUSE of the expectation that the Board will be making decisions as a collective. Otherwise it would be madness to have such a rule constituted in a way.
If we are seriously thinking about forcing the Board to publish the exact votes of each individual member, then I think we need a full review of all our entire constitution and ruleset.
I feel the ability for the Project to individually call for the removal of a specific Board member would be one rule that must be added in such a case.
And I would argue that the rule for the entire Board to be re-elected if 20% of the Membership call for it should be altered, either with a much higher threshold, or removed entirely.