On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 11:21 AM C R cajhne@gmail.com wrote:
I also believe we should follow every bit of advice on how to organise ourselves and conduct meetings in accordance with the SFC's recommendations, since they specialise in adding infrastructure to FOSS projects.
I'm not sure that's what SFC specializes in. It's my understanding that their primary focus is to provide fiduciary oversight and counsel on legal issues. They help to ensure we're above board and compliant as a non-profit. That's not to say they don't do/offer more, but those are the core things. I'd note that over the years it's come across that different orgs under their umbrella operate very differently. I bring that up because while they definitely have dealt with helping projects grow, it's primary focus is keeping the orgs compliant in that process. When asked about infrastructure often they will respond with well Project A did it this way, Project B did it that way, and then they share any insights they gleaned from those different approaches.
Since I joined the board/committee, I've had no guidance on what to do other than to show up at the former board meetings (which apparently were supposed to be status updates). So I'm going to be all ears about how we can move forwards to better serve the project, and our users.
From what I recall, the intention of the committee (formerly board) was to have a group of individuals that handle the in-project side regarding said financial and legal matters and communicating with SFC.
At this point it really seems like we might need to revisit the intention of the committee and the scope of expectations and responsibilities. It comes across as if there is an expectation that the committee should be doing more than what it was intended for. It wasn't intended to be a group of people to control and give direction to the project... that has always been (and in my mind should be) community driven. One example of the committee's role would be if someone had a fully thought out and detailed proposal and wanted funding for it. If the community was behind it, we'd vote on releasing the funds and then we'd basically just be the ones to deal with SFC. I'd be interested to know what other people's opinions are as well as if I'm misremembering the "purpose" of the committee.
Cheers, Josh