[OpenID] Several Questions for the Current & Future Board

[Johannes Ernst]

Scott, note that I did not point fingers to particular individuals, I  
only conveyed information in response to issues that members raised on  
the mailing list that I thought was not generally known to the  
membership but is relevant in the context of this election. ("There  
have been close no financials.") So many people have said recently  
that transparency was important to them; this is one of my  
contributions to that goal, even if it may bruise some egos including  
mine.

As a member of the board, I take full responsibility for all actions  
and non-actions that I have and have not done. If anybody thinks I  
didn't do a good-enough job on the board, please do not vote for me.  
(If anybody has specific questions about what I did and didn't do, and  
why I will attempt to respond as well as I am able -- I do want to be  
accountable to the membership.)

But as you raise specific people and officer's titles:

Unlike others, I did not try to get myself in line for an officer's  
position -- each of which comes with specific responsibilities, which  
is why there is a legal requirement to identify them in state records.  
(Simple reason: I did not think I could commit to delivering them.) I  
reject the notion that I'm somehow responsible for parts of others'  
job descriptions that they volunteered for and I did not, which I  
think you are saying (I hope I'm wrong)

As a board member, it IS my responsibility to be a broken record if  
certain responsibilities are not being met -- otherwise, there are not  
many other things that non-officer board members are for.

Also, I reject your statement that I'm throwing "the rest of the board  
under the bus". I was only referring to financials, and see my views  
above, I do not believe that "the rest of the board" is responsible  
for them. As to not having more "extremely broken records", one is  
usually enough, it's annoying enough as it is to have or be a broken  
record, I know.

And yes, I have enjoyed working with you, too, and hope to continue to  
do that in some fashion. However, personal relationships should not  
get in the way of transparency between board and membership, or  
accountability of board members and officers to the members, in my view.

Thanks,



Johannes.


On Dec 12, 2008, at 13:44, Scott Kveton wrote:

> Johannes: I'm going to apologize in advance to you for the things I'm
> about to say because I have enjoyed working with you on the board for
> the last 2 years.
>
> I appreciate that you were a broken record on this but what did you
> actually do to solve the problem?  Yes, we have a treasurer and ED
> that should have been doing this but nobody on the board (including
> the both of) did anything to make them accountable.
>
> I'll be totally honest and say I'm a little frustrated with you
> throwing the rest of the board under the bus (you've made veiled
> references to this during the election process) when you were a part
> of that board as well.  Its been hard to hear you talk about all the
> things you'll do if you get elected to the board again; why didn't you
> do those when you were on the board in the first place? (that's a
> rhetorical question)
>
> The reality is, until we answer the hard questions posed to this list
> during the election process here (what is the goal of the OIDF?) we
> aren't going to make any progress as an organization.  I don't care if
> its Board 2.0, Board XP or Board Leopard; the hard questions without
> answers remain.
>
> - Scott
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 12:04 PM, Johannes Ernst
> <jernst+openid.net at netmesh.us> wrote:
>> Sadly, so far not even the board has had insight into the financials.
>> Every board I've ever been associated reviews the financials of the
>> organization at or before each board meeting, even if it is only a
>> formality.
>> I went on an extremely broken record for something like a year,  
>> before a
>> (single, one-time, and incomplete) set of financials was provided on
>> November 4th, I believe. Sometimes we did get a bank balance in board
>> meetings, which is better than nothing but a bad governance tool.  
>> The funny
>> thing is, we kept making spending decisions on the board without  
>> having
>> anything resembling a budget that would educate us whether or not we
>> actually had the money to spend.
>> Let's hope the act improves by a mile with board 2.0.
>>
>>
>> On Dec 12, 2008, at 11:46, David Fuelling wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does the OIDF currently make it's budget and financial expenditure
>>>> information public?
>>>>
>>>> Do current candidate have a position on providing full financial
>>>> transparency of OIDF moving forward?
>>>
>>> The OIDF is a 501c3 and by law is required to be transparent with  
>>> its
>>> financials.  Again, I can't imagine *not* doing this.
>>>
>>> - Scott
>>
>> Thanks Scott!  That's what I figured, and Dick was very helpful in  
>> pointing
>> me to this information.
>>
>> In 2009 (let's finish this election first) I would simply suggest/ 
>> request
>> that this type of data be readily accessible from a link on the web- 
>> page (if
>> it's not already -- I didn't see one).
>> _______________________________________________
>> general mailing list
>> general at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> general mailing list
>> general at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general