[OpenID board] [board-private] OIDF ED Update: Agenda for upcoming OIDF board meeting

Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com
Sun Oct 31 18:11:56 UTC 2010


On 2010-10-31, at 10:39 AM, David Recordon wrote:

On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.com> wrote:

Dictating Technical Direction: Per the OIDF website: "The OIDF does not
dictate the technical direction of OpenID; instead it will help enable and
protect whatever is created by the community." Resolutions 2,5,6 and 7.3
(mislabeled as 5.3) all are technical directions, which is inappropriate for
the OIDF.


While I certainly pushed for establishing the organization in such a way
where the Board isn't influencing the technology, the Foundation clearly
isn't operating as we'd all like to see it. I believe a large pieces of this
is a lack of shared direction which is the responsibility of the Board to
establish.


Then we should resolve how the Foundation operates. I don't see how
resolutions stating technical direction are going to change the Foundations
operations. Please elaborate if I am missing the connection.


 To your point of lack of shared direction, I agree, which is why I asked
for a time slot at the board meeting to lead a discussion on this topic.
That is how I hope to play an active role in addressing how the Foundation
operates.


As for the specific details of resolutions 2, 5, 5, and 7.3 I see them as
following what is happening from the little technical activity within the
Foundation and surrounding organizations. To me, these resolutions solely
recognize what is already happening and become a clear statement of "yes,
that's what the Foundation should be focused on" rather than setting a new
direction.


Is there a proposal for a new direction? I don't recall seeing one. The
purpose of the Foundation is contained in the bylaws:


Section 2.2 Specific Purposes. The specific purposes of the corporation
include the following:

(a) To foster and promote the development of, public access to, and adoption
of OpenID as a framework for user-centric identity on the Internet; and

(b) To acquire, create, hold, and manage intellectual property related to
OpenID and provide equal access to such intellectual property to the OpenID
community and public at no charge.







Committee Empowerment: I am uncomfortable with 12 & 13 as they: are board
motions or actions that are in scope for existing committees:  provide broad
powers for a committee to do specific actions with no fiscal accountability.
We have already created committees for doing these actions and empowered
them to decide what was needed to be done. By having this be a board level
decision, we are undermining these committees. The board's responsibility
would be to approve the budget for each of these committees, which likely
would include these activities.


Similar to the previous resolutions, the only committee currently executing
is the Executive Committee. It's reasonable for the Board at this point to
pick up pieces which the Technology Committee has not followed through on.
Same goes for 13.1, 13.2, and 13.3 for the Adoption Committee.


Then the appropriate action would be to address the issues with the
committees by either energizing them or disbanding them.  Micromanaging the
committees demotivates them further. Having a board motion for the committee
to do something does nor resolve the issues of the committees executing.
Another option would be for *you* to participate as a member of those
committees.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20101031/7e9655c6/attachment.html>


More information about the board mailing list