[OpenID board] URGENT: New Board members motion

DeWitt Clinton dewitt at google.com
Tue Nov 4 19:21:28 UTC 2008


I remain uncomfortable adding any new board members, corporate or otherwise,
until we hold the election.

Admittedly, back around Feb/March this year I was vocal about wanting us to
have a larger membership base before holding elections.  A membership drive
was one way to do that.  Another was my suggestion to drop membership fees.

But now I'm reversing my earlier position.  (Had I known the election would
be pushed all the way into 2009 waiting for a membership drive, then I
wouldn't have taken that position to begin with.)

So I recommend we just go ahead and hold the election now.  Worst case, we
have a board that represents a smaller membership than we'd like.  I'd still
prefer that over self-selecting new community board members.

-DeWitt

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:52 AM, Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.com> wrote:

> It will be a while before we can have a real election.
> We agreed we would finish our messaging so that we could then market to the
> membership so that it is clear the value of membership. Then we can have
> nominations, then we can vote.
>
> We are still a little ways from having the messaging done. A marketing
> drive and nomination process likely will take a couple weeks each at least.
> We are minimum a couple months from having an election unfortunately.
>
> -- Dick
>
> On 4-Nov-08, at 11:09 AM, DeWitt Clinton wrote:
>
> Rather than do it this way, why don't we simply start an open nomination
> process (i.e., not nominations made by the board) and schedule a real
> community election, as voted in by the members?
>
> -DeWitt
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:04 AM, Drummond Reed <drummond.reed at cordance.net
> > wrote:
>
>>  +1 to Snorri's nomination – his work speaks for itself.
>>
>>
>> =Drummond
>>
>>   ------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] *On
>> Behalf Of *David Recordon
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 04, 2008 9:42 AM
>> *To:* board at openid.net
>> *Subject:* Re: [OpenID board] URGENT: New Board members motion
>>
>>
>> If we're in nomination mode, then I'd also like to nominate Snorri to join
>> as a community board member (if he is willing to accept that nomination).
>>  Snorri has done amazing community work internationally which should be
>> directly supported by the Foundation.
>>
>>
>> On Nov 4, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Drummond Reed wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>   +1 to all Brian's points here. I want to clarify again that my
>> objection last week was not to moving forward on this – I am very supportive
>> of adding additional corporate board members immediately -- it was only to
>> the difficulty of closing what turned out to be a contentious issue via an
>> email vote.
>>
>>
>> I am all for holding a vote this week if we want to call a meeting. Worst
>> case we could hold the vote at the BOD meeting next Monday afternoon at IIW.
>> (Have we set an exact time/location for that meeting? Will there be dial-in
>> so all board members can participate if they are not at IIW in person?)
>>
>>
>> Also, in terms of community board members, I would like to nominate Brian
>> Kissel to join as a community board member (if he is willing to accept that
>> nomination). I'd move for that vote to be held at the same time so he could
>> join the board at the same time as the new corporate board members.
>>
>>
>> =Drummond
>>
>>   ------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net<board-bounces at openid.net>
>> ] *On Behalf Of *Brian Kissel
>> *Sent:* Monday, November 03, 2008 4:47 PM
>> *To:* board at openid.net
>> *Subject:* Re: [OpenID board] URGENT: New Board members motion
>>
>>
>> +1 with Dick on additional corporate members.  I've had conversations with
>> BBC (Zac Bjelogrlic, Dirk-willem Van.gulik ) and PayPal (Andrew Nash) and
>> know that both organizations would both like to join.  I don't know who else
>> in on the list of possible new members, but if we have up to 5 corporate
>> spots to fill and these two firms are willing to make a commitment of time
>> and dollars, I think we should not delay.
>>
>>
>> BBC has already shown their leadership by hosting the Content Provider
>> Advisory Committee meeting in NYC several weeks ago.  They've also OpenID
>> enabled RadioPop and are looking at additional properties to roll out.
>> They've offered to work with NPR (who was also at the NYC session) to see if
>> we can get BBC, NPR, PBS, and CBC to collaborate on OpenID enablement
>> initiatives.  And in any case, we need some large representative RPs on the
>> BOD.  As I've said before, I think media companies are a next logical
>> adopter of OpenID, so would welcome BBC's membership.
>>
>>
>> PayPal would also be great because they have a lot of experience in
>> managing phishing and general security infrastructure and represent the
>> perspective of merchants and payment infrastructure providers, which we need
>> represented on the BOD if we want to continue to expand the applicability
>> and value of OpenID beyond user generated content access.
>>
>>
>> I don't know if these are the companies we're thinking about voting on
>> near term, but if so, I would strongly endorse their membership.  I also
>> agree with Dick that getting the funding commitment from these two companies
>> in uncertain financial times is critical and will actually help with hiring
>> the new ED and coming up with a reasonable budget for the various
>> initiatives we'll want to undertake in 2009.  For those that didn't see Nat
>> Sakimura's announcement about OpenID Japan<http://openid.net/2008/11/03/openid-japan-launches-with-32-member-companies/>,
>> they are making great progress and we need to have equally compelling
>> aspirations.
>>
>>
>> With respect to community membership, JanRain would certainly welcome the
>> opportunity to contribute as a BOD member, but we'll continue to participate
>> via my membership on the Marketing and Customer Research Committee
>> regardless.
>>
>>
>> We are working with Research Media to get the OpenID membership polling
>> solution working this week and the BOD election system working next week.
>> Regardless of that, I don't think we should wait on the BOD vote the two
>> additional corporate members.
>>
>>
>> There is a lot of good buzz going on right now with the Microsoft and
>> Google announcements.  If we could also announce these two new corporate BOD
>> members at IIW, that we can continue to build on that momentum.
>>
>>
>> So, IMHO, we should do the vote on the 2 additional corporate sponsors
>> right now (assuming they are still willing) and finalize them this week.  If
>> we want to wait on community members, that's fine with me.
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> *==============*
>>
>> *Brian Kissel*
>>
>> *Cell: 503.866.4424*
>>
>> *Fax: 503.296.5502*
>>
>>
>> *From:* board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net<board-bounces at openid.net>
>> ] *On Behalf Of *Dick Hardt
>> *Sent:* Monday, November 03, 2008 3:54 PM
>> *To:* board at openid.net
>> *Subject:* Re: [OpenID board] URGENT: New Board members motion
>>
>>
>> I don't see any advantage to the coupling of hiring an ED and bringing on
>> new board members. Any ED is going to look at the risk of getting paid.
>> Bringing in money before hand is a good sign. In the current economic
>> climate, making a donation to a Foundation is going to come under increased
>> scrutiny.
>>
>>
>> The bylaws allow the board to appoint temporary community board members as
>> need be -- something we would want to do in case someone needs to resign for
>> some reason.
>>
>>
>> Only bringing on corporate members one at elections does not serve us
>> well. We have a product, which is membership, and we should remove barriers
>> to selling it rather then raising it -- and requiring the timing to coincide
>> with an election does not serve anyone well -- except those that want to
>> make board membership exclusive.
>>
>>
>> We have been working on having elections since last March.
>>
>>
>> As noted in my financial report, not bringing these corporate members on
>> board was a bad financial decision.
>>
>>
>> -- Dick
>>
>>
>> On 24-Oct-08, at 6:49 PM, DeWitt Clinton wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sort of.  I think we should have finished the discussion about how to
>> proceed with a full five new corporate board members, timed that around the
>> hiring of the new ED, and ideally scheduled all of it around the election of
>> new community members.  With those three pieces in place we then could make
>> a coordinated engagement on all three.  Four pieces, in fact, as we can
>> count the CRC in there as well.
>>
>> I share your frustration, Dick, and I agree that sometimes a vote makes a
>> good forcing function.  It's taken far too long to get where we are, and I
>> happen to concur that those were fine nominees.  And I especially welcome
>> Brian's continued leadership in any case.
>>
>> Hopefully this is the kick in the pants we need to close in expediently on
>> the missing pieces.  And then I'd welcome seeing this come up for a vote
>> again in the near future.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> -DeWitt
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Do you have a suggestion on how this should have been done differently by
>> me?
>>
>>
>> I made the motion on the board call and agreed to withdraw it until after
>> the membership committee report was published, and then we could do the vote
>> over email. Agreed that the vote should have been started on the public list
>> -- but we are here now.
>>
>>
>> Do you have a new motion to bring the nominees on the board that you would
>> support that we could act upon?
>>
>>
>> -- Dick
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24-Oct-08, at 5:17 PM, DeWitt Clinton wrote:
>>
>>
>> This is not a vote against any of the nominees, but procedurally and
>> organizationally we can do better than this.  Hence to the motion as it
>> stands at this time:
>>
>> -1
>>
>> -DeWitt
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Raj Mata <rajmata at yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>>
>> -1.
>>
>> Agree with Gary.
>>
>> Raj
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On
>>
>> Behalf Of Krall, Gary
>> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 12:42 PM
>> To: board at openid.net
>>
>> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] URGENT: New Board members motion
>>
>> -1.
>>
>> As we are actively in the process of recruiting for a Executive Director
>> which my understanding is should complete shortly coupled; with the
>> manner in which this vote has been requested/handled is a clear
>> indication to me that adding any additional members at this time would
>> not be prudent.
>>
>> Gary.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net]On
>> Behalf Of Dick Hardt
>> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 9:48 AM
>> To: board at openid.net
>> Subject: [OpenID board] URGENT: New Board members motion
>> Importance: High
>>
>>
>> (this motion was originally posted on the board-private list to
>> protect the confidentiality of the potential corporate board members
>> -- reposting to public list to provide transparency to community)
>>
>> Background:
>>
>> There are two corporations that have expressed interest in joining the
>> OpenID Foundation for the last six months. The board approved adding 5
>> new corporate board seats, to be balanced with community seats so that
>> the community seats have a majority.
>> Brian Kissel has been active on the marketing committee and the
>> customer research committee. He organized a gathering of content
>> providers in NY that led to the OpoenID UX summit last Monday.
>> The primary source of funding for the Foundation is corporate board
>> seats. In order to fund a new Executive Director and OpenID adoption
>> initiatives, we need more funding. The patience of the two
>> corporations is running thin as they have been waiting for far to long
>> for a decision from the board.
>>
>> The motion: Add the two corporate board seats and add Brian Kissel as
>> the community seat. Brian's seat (like all other community board
>> seats) would be up for re-election when we hold an election.
>>
>> All board members need to vote or abstain for the motion to be
>> considered.
>>
>> Votes to date:
>>
>> +1 Dick Hardt (made motion)
>> +1 Martin Atkins (seconded motion)
>> -1 David Recordon
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>> signature database 3580 (20081103) __________
>>
>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20081104/b8324aa5/attachment-0002.htm>


More information about the board mailing list