Apache OpenOffice Wiki - User contributions [en]

User:Fossy/scripting-links

2007-10-06T05:51:51Z

Fossy:

This thread is intended as a reference for sources of information about scripting.

Posts dealing with specific topics are linked. Because html page links are not available, I (and, hopefully, others) will add posts on specific areas and this introduction includes, or will include, links to posts on specific topics.

Rather than a thread of many pages containing snippets of current information here and there, I'll try to include supplementary information in existing posts and add contributors to the acknowledgements.

GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS (below)

If there are additional posts, they are linked here : Books and articles : [[/book-articles|Books and articles]]

API, UNO, C++ [[/API-UNO-Cplusplus|API, UNO, C++]]

VBA [[/VBA|VBA]]

Source code, extensions:[link removed]

******************************************************

[b]GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS[/b]

Andrew Pitonyak's links and macro documents: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
API list of external resources: http://api.openoffice.org/TipsAndTricks/external.html
Calc macro recorder : http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#104617
Code Snippets (openoffice.org): http://codesnippets.services.openoffice.org/
Danny's Examples: http://kosh.datateamsys.com/~danny/OOo/Examples/
Disemia's Basic tutorials and examples: http://disemia.com/software/openoffice/
Ian Laurenson's macro documents and spreadsheets: http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/hillview/OOo/
openofficetips : http://www.openofficetips.com/blog/archives/openoffice_basic/index.html
probe1's Basic macros: http://www.winnirohr.de/ooo/makros/index.html
Searching : [list]API advanced search : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/Search?mode=advanced
API dev list (archive) : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=dev[/list]
Software Developers' Kit (SDK): http://download.openoffice.org/2.1.0/sdk.html
(can be used with Xray)
Starting in Basic and CookBook : [list][url]http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Extensions_development_basic[/url]
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/CookBook[/list]
Tools for scripting (including Xray): http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php
Tutorials: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Category:Tutorial
Writer - a brief introduction : http://software.newsforge.com/software/05/09/20/1840248.shtml?tid=152&tid=93
Writer kit: http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Office/Office-Suites/Ooo-macro-6402.shtml
Xray: http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?t=50083 http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#101416 http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=87718&package_id=101416

There is [b]a replacement macro recorder[/b] available as an extension here:
[url]http://www.paolo-mantovani.org/downloads/DispatchToApiRecorder/[/url]

[quote="Paolo Mantovani in Jan.07"]
You need also to install at least one "transformer" (currently there is only a Calc Transformer). The transformer is also an extension and is the component that actually makes the Dispatch-to-API translation of the macro code.

After the installation, you do not need to know anything else: reboot openoffice and just use the macro recorder as usual.

If you want to switch back to the "classic" macro recorder you have only to remove or disable both extensions from the extension manager dialog.[/quote]

[b]OpenOffice.org[/b]
Documentation - How to: http://documentation.openoffice.org./HOW_TO/index.html
- How To Modify Context Menus in OOo (Writer)
- How to Distribute Macros with an Addon
- How To Organize and Call Macros in OOo
Documentation - Manuals: http://documentation.openoffice.org/manuals/oooauthors/index.html
- Getting Started with Macros
Object Inspector : http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Object_Inspector
OpenOffice.org for Developers: http://development.openoffice.org/index.html
Scripting framework project: http://framework.openoffice.org/scripting/

User:Fossy/scripting-links

2007-10-06T05:51:11Z

Fossy:

This thread is intended as a reference for sources of information about scripting.

Posts dealing with specific topics are linked. Because html page links are not available, I (and, hopefully, others) will add posts on specific areas and this introduction includes, or will include, links to posts on specific topics.

Rather than a thread of many pages containing snippets of current information here and there, I'll try to include supplementary information in existing posts and add contributors to the acknowledgements.

GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS (below)

If there are additional posts, they are linked here : Books and articles : [[/book-articles|Books and articles]]

API, UNO, C++ [[/API-UNO-Cplusplus|API, UNO, C++]]

VBA [[/scripting-links/VBA|VBA]]

Source code, extensions:[link removed]

******************************************************

[b]GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS[/b]

Andrew Pitonyak's links and macro documents: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
API list of external resources: http://api.openoffice.org/TipsAndTricks/external.html
Calc macro recorder : http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#104617
Code Snippets (openoffice.org): http://codesnippets.services.openoffice.org/
Danny's Examples: http://kosh.datateamsys.com/~danny/OOo/Examples/
Disemia's Basic tutorials and examples: http://disemia.com/software/openoffice/
Ian Laurenson's macro documents and spreadsheets: http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/hillview/OOo/
openofficetips : http://www.openofficetips.com/blog/archives/openoffice_basic/index.html
probe1's Basic macros: http://www.winnirohr.de/ooo/makros/index.html
Searching : [list]API advanced search : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/Search?mode=advanced
API dev list (archive) : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=dev[/list]
Software Developers' Kit (SDK): http://download.openoffice.org/2.1.0/sdk.html
(can be used with Xray)
Starting in Basic and CookBook : [list][url]http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Extensions_development_basic[/url]
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/CookBook[/list]
Tools for scripting (including Xray): http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php
Tutorials: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Category:Tutorial
Writer - a brief introduction : http://software.newsforge.com/software/05/09/20/1840248.shtml?tid=152&tid=93
Writer kit: http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Office/Office-Suites/Ooo-macro-6402.shtml
Xray: http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?t=50083 http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#101416 http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=87718&package_id=101416

There is [b]a replacement macro recorder[/b] available as an extension here:
[url]http://www.paolo-mantovani.org/downloads/DispatchToApiRecorder/[/url]

[quote="Paolo Mantovani in Jan.07"]
You need also to install at least one "transformer" (currently there is only a Calc Transformer). The transformer is also an extension and is the component that actually makes the Dispatch-to-API translation of the macro code.

After the installation, you do not need to know anything else: reboot openoffice and just use the macro recorder as usual.

If you want to switch back to the "classic" macro recorder you have only to remove or disable both extensions from the extension manager dialog.[/quote]

[b]OpenOffice.org[/b]
Documentation - How to: http://documentation.openoffice.org./HOW_TO/index.html
- How To Modify Context Menus in OOo (Writer)
- How to Distribute Macros with an Addon
- How To Organize and Call Macros in OOo
Documentation - Manuals: http://documentation.openoffice.org/manuals/oooauthors/index.html
- Getting Started with Macros
Object Inspector : http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Object_Inspector
OpenOffice.org for Developers: http://development.openoffice.org/index.html
Scripting framework project: http://framework.openoffice.org/scripting/

User:Fossy/scripting-links/API-UNO-Cplusplus

2007-10-06T05:45:19Z

Fossy:

APPLICATION PROGRAMMING INTERFACE (API)

Home page: http://api.openoffice.org/
Advanced search: http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/Search?mode=advanced

Contents: http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/module-ix.html
Index: http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/index-files/index-1.html

Tips and Tricks: http://api.openoffice.org/TipsAndTricks/internal.html

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -

UNIVERSAL NETWORK OBJECTS (UNO)

Commands: http://www.openoffice.org/files/documents/25/2570/commandsReference.html
[http://udk.openoffice.org/ UNO project]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -

C++

[http://perso.wanadoo.fr/moutou/index.html#OOoDoclink SergeM's UNO/C++ page]
[http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Using_Cpp_with_the_OOo_SDK wiki page]
[http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8550 Writing a Program to Control OpenOffice.org, Part 1]
[http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/8608 Writing a Program to Control OpenOffice.org, Part 2]

User:Fossy/scripting-links/API-UNO-Cplusplus

2007-10-06T05:44:05Z

Fossy:

APPLICATION PROGRAMMING INTERFACE (API)

Home page: http://api.openoffice.org/
Advanced search: http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/Search?mode=advanced

Contents: http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/module-ix.html
Index: http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/index-files/index-1.html
Tips and Tricks: http://api.openoffice.org/TipsAndTricks/internal.html

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -

UNIVERSAL NETWORK OBJECTS (UNO)

Commands: http://www.openoffice.org/files/documents/25/2570/commandsReference.html
[http://udk.openoffice.org/ UNO project] universal network objects]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -

C++

[http://perso.wanadoo.fr/moutou/index.html#OOoDoclink SergeM's UNO/C++ page]
[http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Using_Cpp_with_the_OOo_SDK wiki page]
[http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8550 Writing a Program to Control OpenOffice.org, Part 1]
[http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/8608 Writing a Program to Control OpenOffice.org, Part 2]

User:Fossy/First draft

2007-10-06T05:42:03Z

Fossy:

Charter of the Site Management Group
== Scope of this charter and interpretation ==
This Charter relates to the affairs of the group ( "the group" ) empowered to govern the website users.services.openoffice.org (or any successor to that site) ("the site") and its sub-domains

The paramount purpose of the site is to provide information and support relevant to the use of the software produced by the owner of www.openoffice.org (or any successor to that website)

The group may adopt any other purpose which in its judgement supports the paramount purpose of the site or the performance of the group's functions

A member of the group is referred to in this charter as a manager unless the context indicates otherwise and members are referred to as managers

All times and periods shall be measured according to Greenwich Mean Time

The charter shall be deemed to be enabling and not to impose liability

Particular provisions are for the sake of clarification and not intended to reduce the fullness of the group's power and authority
== Membership of the group ==
All members of the site are eligible to join the group
Functions of the group
The group may govern the site

The group may

* govern, regulate and supervise membership, content, management and administration of the site
* administer its own affairs as fully as those of the site
* appoint officers ( "officers" ) to perform any functions
* enlist any assistance it sees fit
* delegate any power or function
* conduct polls
* amend or replace this charter

Managers may hold discussions using any vehicle or vehicles they choose

Any manager may request, by email to a returning officer, that any matter be made the subject of a poll of managers, whereupon a returning officer may give notice by email to the manager of the action which the returning officer intends to take (or not to take)
== Polls ==
Polls of managers may be called by

* an overseer
* a returning officer
* a site administrator
* any two officers acting jointly

A vote may be cast by email from a manager to a returning officer

The results of polls shall be determined by simple majority of the votes actually cast without any requirement for a quorum and shall be binding on the group until amended or revoked by a subsequent poll

An overseer may suspend the effect of a poll ( "the first poll" ) until a further poll is held, in which case a poll may be conducted to confirm, amend or revoke the suspended poll. Once the first poll has been confirmed by another poll, its effect may not be suspended
== Officers ==
The group may appoint any officers it deems expedient

The group may appoint

* one or more overseers
* one or more returning officers
* one or more site administrators
* one or more administrators for any facility on the site
* one or more moderators for any facility on the site

Managers may hold more than one office

Officers may be appointed by poll and may hold office until resigning, removed or replaced

The tenure of any officer or officers and of all officers may be reviewed at any time
== Overseer ==
An overseer may

* hold a poll of managers or any class of managers at any time
* suspend or remove any officer from office (except another overseer), whereupon the overseer shall hold a poll of managers to review that action
* jointly with another officer, suspend any overseer from office, whereupon the overseer performing the suspension shall hold a poll of managers to review that action and the suspended overseer may do so (even though suspended)

== Returning Officer ==
A returning officer may

* exercise any power conferred on her or him
* hold a poll of managers at any time

== Site Administrators ==
A site administrator may

* exercise any power conferred on her or him
* hold a poll of managers at any time

== Other Officers ==
Other officers ( including administrators and moderators ) may

* exercise any power conferred on her or him
* jointly with another officer, hold a poll of managers at any time

== Annual Review ==
Notwithstanding other polls which may be conducted, the group will hold a review each calendar year

The officers will use their best endeavours to conduct and complete the review after August and before November in each calendar year [editing note: this period has been chosen so as not to conflict with holiday periods]

Any manager may place any matter on the agenda for the review at any time by email to a returning officer but consideration of any matter may be deferred until after the review if notice from the manager is received after August in that year

An overseer or returning officer may produce an agenda and send it to managers

If no agenda has been sent by midnight on August 15th any officer may produce and send the agenda and may be provided with email addresses for that purpose

Polls relating to matters on the agenda may be conducted at any time six weeks after the agenda has been sent to managers
== Date ==
This charter was submitted to a vote of founding members of the site / group in September 2007

User:Fossy/scripting-links/VBA

2007-10-06T05:39:20Z

Fossy:

vba

[http://www.business-spreadsheets.com/vba2oo.asp Excel VBA to OpenOffice Basic Converter]
[http://www.kalitech.fr/clients/doc/VB_APIOOo_en.html Programming OpenOffice.org with Visual Basic]
[http://documentation.openoffice.org/HOW_TO/various_topics/VbaStarBasicXref.sxw VBA/StarBasic] [http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/VBA Wiki page]

User:Fossy/scripting-links

2007-10-06T05:38:28Z

Fossy:

User:Fossy/scripting-links

2007-10-06T05:36:54Z

Fossy:

This thread is intended as a reference for sources of information about scripting.

Posts dealing with specific topics are linked. Because html page links are not available, I (and, hopefully, others) will add posts on specific areas and this introduction includes, or will include, links to posts on specific topics.

Rather than a thread of many pages containing snippets of current information here and there, I'll try to include supplementary information in existing posts and add contributors to the acknowledgements.

GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS (below)

If there are additional posts, they are linked here : Books and articles : [[/book-articles|Books and articles]]

API, UNO, C++ [[/API-UNO-C++|API, UNO, C++]]

VBA [[/VBA|VBA]]

Source code, extensions:[link removed]

******************************************************

[b]GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS[/b]

Andrew Pitonyak's links and macro documents: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
API list of external resources: http://api.openoffice.org/TipsAndTricks/external.html
Calc macro recorder : http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#104617
Code Snippets (openoffice.org): http://codesnippets.services.openoffice.org/
Danny's Examples: http://kosh.datateamsys.com/~danny/OOo/Examples/
Disemia's Basic tutorials and examples: http://disemia.com/software/openoffice/
Ian Laurenson's macro documents and spreadsheets: http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/hillview/OOo/
openofficetips : http://www.openofficetips.com/blog/archives/openoffice_basic/index.html
probe1's Basic macros: http://www.winnirohr.de/ooo/makros/index.html
Searching : [list]API advanced search : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/Search?mode=advanced
API dev list (archive) : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=dev[/list]
Software Developers' Kit (SDK): http://download.openoffice.org/2.1.0/sdk.html
(can be used with Xray)
Starting in Basic and CookBook : [list][url]http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Extensions_development_basic[/url]
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/CookBook[/list]
Tools for scripting (including Xray): http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php
Tutorials: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Category:Tutorial
Writer - a brief introduction : http://software.newsforge.com/software/05/09/20/1840248.shtml?tid=152&tid=93
Writer kit: http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Office/Office-Suites/Ooo-macro-6402.shtml
Xray: http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?t=50083 http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#101416 http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=87718&package_id=101416

There is [b]a replacement macro recorder[/b] available as an extension here:
[url]http://www.paolo-mantovani.org/downloads/DispatchToApiRecorder/[/url]

[quote="Paolo Mantovani in Jan.07"]
You need also to install at least one "transformer" (currently there is only a Calc Transformer). The transformer is also an extension and is the component that actually makes the Dispatch-to-API translation of the macro code.

After the installation, you do not need to know anything else: reboot openoffice and just use the macro recorder as usual.

If you want to switch back to the "classic" macro recorder you have only to remove or disable both extensions from the extension manager dialog.[/quote]

[b]OpenOffice.org[/b]
Documentation - How to: http://documentation.openoffice.org./HOW_TO/index.html
- How To Modify Context Menus in OOo (Writer)
- How to Distribute Macros with an Addon
- How To Organize and Call Macros in OOo
Documentation - Manuals: http://documentation.openoffice.org/manuals/oooauthors/index.html
- Getting Started with Macros
Object Inspector : http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Object_Inspector
OpenOffice.org for Developers: http://development.openoffice.org/index.html
Scripting framework project: http://framework.openoffice.org/scripting/

User:Fossy/scripting-links/book-articles

2007-10-06T05:34:45Z

Fossy:

BOOKS AND ARTICLES

Books

[http://www.pitonyak.org/book/ OpenOffice.org Macros Explained] Andrew Pitonyak
[http://www.eyrolles.com/Informatique/Livre/9782212117639/livre-programmation-openoffice-org-2.php Programmation OpenOffice.org 2] B. Marcelly, L. Godard
[http://www.packtpub.com/openoffice-ooobasic-calc-automation/book Spreadsheet Macro Programming] Dr M. A. Bain

User:Fossy/scripting-links

2007-10-06T05:33:36Z

Fossy:

This thread is intended as a reference for sources of information about scripting.

Posts dealing with specific topics are linked. Because html page links are not available, I (and, hopefully, others) will add posts on specific areas and this introduction includes, or will include, links to posts on specific topics.

Rather than a thread of many pages containing snippets of current information here and there, I'll try to include supplementary information in existing posts and add contributors to the acknowledgements.

GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS (below)

If there are additional posts, they are linked here : [list]Books and articles : [[/book-articles|Books and articles]]

API, UNO, C++ [link removed]

VBA [link removed]

Source code, extensions:[link removed]

******************************************************

[b]GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS[/b]

Andrew Pitonyak's links and macro documents: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
API list of external resources: http://api.openoffice.org/TipsAndTricks/external.html
Calc macro recorder : http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#104617
Code Snippets (openoffice.org): http://codesnippets.services.openoffice.org/
Danny's Examples: http://kosh.datateamsys.com/~danny/OOo/Examples/
Disemia's Basic tutorials and examples: http://disemia.com/software/openoffice/
Ian Laurenson's macro documents and spreadsheets: http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/hillview/OOo/
openofficetips : http://www.openofficetips.com/blog/archives/openoffice_basic/index.html
probe1's Basic macros: http://www.winnirohr.de/ooo/makros/index.html
Searching : [list]API advanced search : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/Search?mode=advanced
API dev list (archive) : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=dev[/list]
Software Developers' Kit (SDK): http://download.openoffice.org/2.1.0/sdk.html
(can be used with Xray)
Starting in Basic and CookBook : [list][url]http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Extensions_development_basic[/url]
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/CookBook[/list]
Tools for scripting (including Xray): http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php
Tutorials: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Category:Tutorial
Writer - a brief introduction : http://software.newsforge.com/software/05/09/20/1840248.shtml?tid=152&tid=93
Writer kit: http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Office/Office-Suites/Ooo-macro-6402.shtml
Xray: http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?t=50083 http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#101416 http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=87718&package_id=101416

There is [b]a replacement macro recorder[/b] available as an extension here:
[url]http://www.paolo-mantovani.org/downloads/DispatchToApiRecorder/[/url]

[quote="Paolo Mantovani in Jan.07"]
You need also to install at least one "transformer" (currently there is only a Calc Transformer). The transformer is also an extension and is the component that actually makes the Dispatch-to-API translation of the macro code.

After the installation, you do not need to know anything else: reboot openoffice and just use the macro recorder as usual.

If you want to switch back to the "classic" macro recorder you have only to remove or disable both extensions from the extension manager dialog.[/quote]

[b]OpenOffice.org[/b]
Documentation - How to: http://documentation.openoffice.org./HOW_TO/index.html
- How To Modify Context Menus in OOo (Writer)
- How to Distribute Macros with an Addon
- How To Organize and Call Macros in OOo
Documentation - Manuals: http://documentation.openoffice.org/manuals/oooauthors/index.html
- Getting Started with Macros
Object Inspector : http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Object_Inspector
OpenOffice.org for Developers: http://development.openoffice.org/index.html
Scripting framework project: http://framework.openoffice.org/scripting/

User:Fossy/scripting-links

2007-10-06T05:30:03Z

Fossy:

This thread is intended as a reference for sources of information about scripting.

Posts dealing with specific topics are linked. Because html page links are not available, I (and, hopefully, others) will add posts on specific areas and this introduction includes, or will include, links to posts on specific topics.

Rather than a thread of many pages containing snippets of current information here and there, I'll try to include supplementary information in existing posts and add contributors to the acknowledgements.

GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS (below)

If there are additional posts, they are linked here : [list]Books and articles : [[book-articles|Books and articles]]

API, UNO, C++ [link removed]

VBA [link removed]

Source code, extensions:[link removed]

******************************************************

[b]GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS[/b]

Andrew Pitonyak's links and macro documents: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
API list of external resources: http://api.openoffice.org/TipsAndTricks/external.html
Calc macro recorder : http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#104617
Code Snippets (openoffice.org): http://codesnippets.services.openoffice.org/
Danny's Examples: http://kosh.datateamsys.com/~danny/OOo/Examples/
Disemia's Basic tutorials and examples: http://disemia.com/software/openoffice/
Ian Laurenson's macro documents and spreadsheets: http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/hillview/OOo/
openofficetips : http://www.openofficetips.com/blog/archives/openoffice_basic/index.html
probe1's Basic macros: http://www.winnirohr.de/ooo/makros/index.html
Searching : [list]API advanced search : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/Search?mode=advanced
API dev list (archive) : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=dev[/list]
Software Developers' Kit (SDK): http://download.openoffice.org/2.1.0/sdk.html
(can be used with Xray)
Starting in Basic and CookBook : [list][url]http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Extensions_development_basic[/url]
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/CookBook[/list]
Tools for scripting (including Xray): http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php
Tutorials: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Category:Tutorial
Writer - a brief introduction : http://software.newsforge.com/software/05/09/20/1840248.shtml?tid=152&tid=93
Writer kit: http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Office/Office-Suites/Ooo-macro-6402.shtml
Xray: http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?t=50083 http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#101416 http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=87718&package_id=101416

There is [b]a replacement macro recorder[/b] available as an extension here:
[url]http://www.paolo-mantovani.org/downloads/DispatchToApiRecorder/[/url]

[quote="Paolo Mantovani in Jan.07"]
You need also to install at least one "transformer" (currently there is only a Calc Transformer). The transformer is also an extension and is the component that actually makes the Dispatch-to-API translation of the macro code.

After the installation, you do not need to know anything else: reboot openoffice and just use the macro recorder as usual.

If you want to switch back to the "classic" macro recorder you have only to remove or disable both extensions from the extension manager dialog.[/quote]

[b]OpenOffice.org[/b]
Documentation - How to: http://documentation.openoffice.org./HOW_TO/index.html
- How To Modify Context Menus in OOo (Writer)
- How to Distribute Macros with an Addon
- How To Organize and Call Macros in OOo
Documentation - Manuals: http://documentation.openoffice.org/manuals/oooauthors/index.html
- Getting Started with Macros
Object Inspector : http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Object_Inspector
OpenOffice.org for Developers: http://development.openoffice.org/index.html
Scripting framework project: http://framework.openoffice.org/scripting/

User:Fossy/scripting-links

2007-10-06T05:27:07Z

Fossy:

This thread is intended as a reference for sources of information about scripting.

Posts dealing with specific topics are linked. Because html page links are not available, I (and, hopefully, others) will add posts on specific areas and this introduction includes, or will include, links to posts on specific topics.

Rather than a thread of many pages containing snippets of current information here and there, I'll try to include supplementary information in existing posts and add contributors to the acknowledgements.

GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS (below)

If there are additional posts, they are linked here : [list]Books and articles : [link removed]

API, UNO, C++ [link removed]

VBA [link removed]

Source code, extensions:[link removed]

******************************************************

[b]GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS[/b]

Andrew Pitonyak's links and macro documents: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
API list of external resources: http://api.openoffice.org/TipsAndTricks/external.html
Calc macro recorder : http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#104617
Code Snippets (openoffice.org): http://codesnippets.services.openoffice.org/
Danny's Examples: http://kosh.datateamsys.com/~danny/OOo/Examples/
Disemia's Basic tutorials and examples: http://disemia.com/software/openoffice/
Ian Laurenson's macro documents and spreadsheets: http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/hillview/OOo/
openofficetips : http://www.openofficetips.com/blog/archives/openoffice_basic/index.html
probe1's Basic macros: http://www.winnirohr.de/ooo/makros/index.html
Searching : [list]API advanced search : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/Search?mode=advanced
API dev list (archive) : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=dev[/list]
Software Developers' Kit (SDK): http://download.openoffice.org/2.1.0/sdk.html
(can be used with Xray)
Starting in Basic and CookBook : [list][url]http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Extensions_development_basic[/url]
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/CookBook[/list]
Tools for scripting (including Xray): http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php
Tutorials: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Category:Tutorial
Writer - a brief introduction : http://software.newsforge.com/software/05/09/20/1840248.shtml?tid=152&tid=93
Writer kit: http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Office/Office-Suites/Ooo-macro-6402.shtml
Xray: http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?t=50083 http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#101416 http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=87718&package_id=101416

There is [b]a replacement macro recorder[/b] available as an extension here:
[url]http://www.paolo-mantovani.org/downloads/DispatchToApiRecorder/[/url]

[quote="Paolo Mantovani in Jan.07"]
You need also to install at least one "transformer" (currently there is only a Calc Transformer). The transformer is also an extension and is the component that actually makes the Dispatch-to-API translation of the macro code.

After the installation, you do not need to know anything else: reboot openoffice and just use the macro recorder as usual.

If you want to switch back to the "classic" macro recorder you have only to remove or disable both extensions from the extension manager dialog.[/quote]

[b]OpenOffice.org[/b]
Documentation - How to: http://documentation.openoffice.org./HOW_TO/index.html
- How To Modify Context Menus in OOo (Writer)
- How to Distribute Macros with an Addon
- How To Organize and Call Macros in OOo
Documentation - Manuals: http://documentation.openoffice.org/manuals/oooauthors/index.html
- Getting Started with Macros
Object Inspector : http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Object_Inspector
OpenOffice.org for Developers: http://development.openoffice.org/index.html
Scripting framework project: http://framework.openoffice.org/scripting/

User:Fossy/scripting-links

2007-10-06T05:21:11Z

Fossy: Scripting links

This thread is intended as a reference for sources of information about scripting.

Posts dealing with specific topics are linked. Because html page links are not available, I (and, hopefully, others) will add posts on specific areas and this introduction includes, or will include, links to posts on specific topics.

Rather than a thread of many pages containing snippets of current information here and there, I'll try to include supplementary information in existing posts and add contributors to the acknowledgements.

GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS (below)

If there are additional posts, they are linked here : [list]Books and articles : [link removed]

API, UNO, C++ [link removed]

VBA [link removed]

Source code, extensions:[link removed]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[b]GENERAL INFORMATION AND AIDS[/b]

Andrew Pitonyak's links and macro documents: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
API list of external resources: http://api.openoffice.org/TipsAndTricks/external.html
Calc macro recorder : http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#104617
Code Snippets (openoffice.org): http://codesnippets.services.openoffice.org/
Danny's Examples: http://kosh.datateamsys.com/~danny/OOo/Examples/
Disemia's Basic tutorials and examples: http://disemia.com/software/openoffice/
Ian Laurenson's macro documents and spreadsheets: http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/hillview/OOo/
openofficetips : http://www.openofficetips.com/blog/archives/openoffice_basic/index.html
probe1's Basic macros: http://www.winnirohr.de/ooo/makros/index.html
Searching : [list]API advanced search : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/Search?mode=advanced
API dev list (archive) : http://api.openoffice.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=dev[/list]
Software Developers' Kit (SDK): http://download.openoffice.org/2.1.0/sdk.html
(can be used with Xray)
Starting in Basic and CookBook : [list][url]http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Extensions_development_basic[/url]
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/CookBook[/list]
Tools for scripting (including Xray): http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php
Tutorials: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Category:Tutorial
Writer - a brief introduction : http://software.newsforge.com/software/05/09/20/1840248.shtml?tid=152&tid=93
Writer kit: http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Office/Office-Suites/Ooo-macro-6402.shtml
Xray: http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?t=50083 http://www.ooomacros.org/dev.php#101416 http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=87718&package_id=101416

There is [b]a replacement macro recorder[/b] available as an extension here:
[url]http://www.paolo-mantovani.org/downloads/DispatchToApiRecorder/[/url]

[quote="Paolo Mantovani in Jan.07"]
You need also to install at least one "transformer" (currently there is only a Calc Transformer). The transformer is also an extension and is the component that actually makes the Dispatch-to-API translation of the macro code.

After the installation, you do not need to know anything else: reboot openoffice and just use the macro recorder as usual.

If you want to switch back to the "classic" macro recorder you have only to remove or disable both extensions from the extension manager dialog.[/quote]

[b]OpenOffice.org[/b]
Documentation - How to: http://documentation.openoffice.org./HOW_TO/index.html
- How To Modify Context Menus in OOo (Writer)
- How to Distribute Macros with an Addon
- How To Organize and Call Macros in OOo
Documentation - Manuals: http://documentation.openoffice.org/manuals/oooauthors/index.html
- Getting Started with Macros
Object Inspector : http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Object_Inspector
OpenOffice.org for Developers: http://development.openoffice.org/index.html
Scripting framework project: http://framework.openoffice.org/scripting/

User:Fossy

2007-10-06T05:05:03Z

Fossy: /* testing creation */

== testing creation ==

'''[[/home page|site home page]]'''

[[/First draft|First draft]]

[[/sandbox|Sandbox]]

[[/scripting-links|Scripting links]]

User talk:Fossy

2007-10-06T05:00:02Z

Fossy:

User:Fossy/First draft

2007-09-23T01:07:33Z

Fossy:

failed the comprehension test

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-20T10:16:02Z

Fossy:

obsolete

User:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-20T10:10:57Z

Fossy:

rejected

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T14:00:41Z

Fossy: /* List of issues and votes */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

:They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

:I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

:admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

:Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

::The site page about content should not be in the charter.

::Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

== Other draft pages ==

:'''We need more wiki pages'''. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::'''I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page'''. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

On further reflection, I suppose it does not have to be on TerryE's site, so I've put it on the '''[[User:Fossy/home_page|site home page]]'''

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 12:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

:Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
::[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::'''The charter needs to say''' that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

:::The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

:::That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
:::Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

:::The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

:::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== List of issues and votes ==

What are the issues to be resolved? Write an issue here and we'll vote on it.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> athos' idea <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T13:45:53Z

Fossy: Other draft pages

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

:They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

:I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

:admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

:Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

::The site page about content should not be in the charter.

::Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

== Other draft pages ==

:'''We need more wiki pages'''. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::'''I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page'''. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

On further reflection, I suppose it does not have to be on TerryE's site, so I've put it on the '''[[User:Fossy/home_page|site home page]]'''

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 12:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

:Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
::[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::'''The charter needs to say''' that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

:::The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

:::That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
:::Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

:::The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

:::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== A list of issues by each user ==

What are the issues to be resolved? Each write a list of issues and then we'll vote on a comprehensive list.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> athos' idea <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T13:43:32Z

Fossy: A list of issues by each user

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

:They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

:I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

:admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

:Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

::The site page about content should not be in the charter.

::Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''We need more wiki pages'''. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::'''I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page'''. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

On further reflection, I suppose it does not have to be on TerryE's site, so I've put it on the '''[[User:Fossy/home_page|site home page]]'''

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 12:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

:Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
::[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::'''The charter needs to say''' that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

:::The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

:::That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
:::Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

:::The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

:::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== A list of issues by each user ==

What are the issues to be resolved? Each write a list of issues and then we'll vote on a comprehensive list.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> athos' idea <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T13:39:50Z

Fossy: SUMMARY OF VIEWS BY EACH USER

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

:They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

:I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

:admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

:Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

::The site page about content should not be in the charter.

::Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''We need more wiki pages'''. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::'''I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page'''. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

On further reflection, I suppose it does not have to be on TerryE's site, so I've put it on the '''[[User:Fossy/home_page|site home page]]'''

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 12:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

:Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
::[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::'''The charter needs to say''' that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

:::The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

:::That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
:::Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

:::The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

:::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== SUMMARY OF VIEWS BY EACH USER ==

How should the matters discussed be resolved? State your conclusion so that we can arrive at a decision.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> athos' idea <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T13:21:42Z

Fossy: /* From the oo.o site use page */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

:They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

:I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

:admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

:Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

::The site page about content should not be in the charter.

::Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''We need more wiki pages'''. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::'''I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page'''. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

On further reflection, I suppose it does not have to be on TerryE's site, so I've put it on the '''[[User:Fossy/home_page|site home page]]'''

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 12:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

:Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
::[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::'''The charter needs to say''' that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

:::The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

:::That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
:::Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

:::The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

:::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T12:55:07Z

Fossy: /* From the oo.o site use page */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

:They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

:I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

:admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

:Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

::The site page about content should not be in the charter.

::Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''We need more wiki pages'''. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::'''I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page'''. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

On further reflection, I suppose it does not have to be on TerryE's site, so I've put it on the [[User:Fossy/home_page|site home page]]

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 12:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

:Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
::[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::'''The charter needs to say''' that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

:::The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

:::That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
:::Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

:::The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

:::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User:Fossy/home page

2007-09-06T12:51:58Z

Fossy:

=='''Welcome to the user services site of openoffice.org'''==
== Purpose of this site ==
This site has been provided by openoffice.org to facilitate participation by users of its software in supporting the use and development of the software and associated extensions and scripts. Anyone can participate in the forum and other vehicles provided by registering and logging in as a member.

To register, you will need to agree to the forum rules, which govern posting in the forum. There is also a forum guide. You will also need to provide a real email address which will not be disclosed to other than site officers. The address is required to enable the site's personnel to communicate with you if necessary, for example, in the event of your forgetting your password or wishing to make any changes to your registered details.

Once you are registered, you may log in on this page or the forum index page. Logging into this site will have the effect of logging you into the parent site so that you may, for example, lodge issues, comments or votes on the qa site, subscribe to mailing lists and edit the wiki.
== Site development ==
Further developments will include more links in the sidebar of this page and a dedicated links page. There may also be provision for members and groups of members to have blogs on the site. A privacy policy statement will be added to the site.
== Site administration ==
Management of the site is under the control of a management group of volunteers. Any member of the site may join the management group by applying on the user groups page of the forum. By joining the management group, you become eligible to hold office and to participate in elections of the board and other decisions made by the group. The group hopes to provide access to training materials and opportunities for its members.

By joining the group, you also agree to the management charter. The group has delegated administration to a board of directors. The board has primary responsibility for appointing web masters, administrators and moderators from the members of the management group.

User:Fossy/home page

2007-09-06T12:50:56Z

Fossy:

User:Fossy

2007-09-06T12:46:26Z

Fossy: /* testing creation */

== testing creation ==

'''[[/home page|site home page]]'''

[[/First draft|First draft]]

[[/sandbox|Sandbox]]

User:Fossy

2007-09-06T12:45:36Z

Fossy: /* testing creation */

== testing creation ==

[[/home page|site home page]]

'''[[/First draft|First draft]]'''

'''[[/sandbox|Sandbox]]'''

User:TerryE

2007-09-06T12:38:43Z

Fossy: /* My Sandbox */

== IT Professional ==
I am a maths graduate who has worked in the IT industry for over 30 years, starting in as a commercial programmer in my gap year before university, and then in mathematical and realtime programming after graduating. I worked for a leading UK systems house and consultancy after graduating initially in mathematical and real-time programming (via the signal processing connection), then worked up the development and services hierarchy to become chief engineer and technical manager of various business units. During this time my company was acquired by one of the top global IT companies. The last three posts that I've had are divisional CTO jobs.

I am also actively involved in the OpenOffice community.

== List of contributions ==

== My Sandbox ==

*Now obsolete '''[[/Draft_Constitution1|Draft Constitution (Wolf)]]'''
*Current working draft '''[[/Draft_Constitution2|Draft Constitution (Athos)]]'''
*Text for site home '''[[User:Fossy/home_page|Site home page]]'''

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T10:44:07Z

Fossy: /* From the oo.o site use page */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

:They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

:I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

:admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

:Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

::The site page about content should not be in the charter.

::Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''We need more wiki pages'''. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::'''I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page'''. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

On further reflection, I suppose it does not have to be on TerryE's site, so I've put it [http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Fossy/home_page here]

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 12:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

:Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
::[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::'''The charter needs to say''' that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

:::The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

:::That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
:::Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

:::The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

:::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User:TerryE

2007-09-06T10:43:07Z

Fossy: /* My Sandbox */

User:TerryE

2007-09-06T10:40:52Z

Fossy: /* My Sandbox */

User:Fossy

2007-09-06T10:39:42Z

Fossy:

== testing creation ==

[[/home page|home page]]

'''[[/First draft|First draft]]'''

'''[[/sandbox|Sandbox]]'''

User:TerryE

2007-09-06T10:39:16Z

Fossy: /* My Sandbox */

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T10:34:14Z

Fossy: /* From the oo.o site use page */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

:They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

:I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

:admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

:Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

::The site page about content should not be in the charter.

::Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''We need more wiki pages'''. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::'''I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page'''. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

On further reflection, I suppose it does not have to be on TerryE's site, so I've put it [[http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Fossy/home_page here]]

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 12:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

:Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
::[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::'''The charter needs to say''' that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

:::The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

:::That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
:::Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

:::The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

:::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User:Fossy/home page

2007-09-06T10:30:17Z

Fossy: oooug home page

Welcome to the user services site of openoffice.org
== Purpose of this site ==
This site has been provided by openoffice.org to facilitate participation by users of its software in supporting the use and development of the software and associated extensions and scripts. Anyone can participate in the forum and other vehicles provided by registering and logging in as a member.

To register, you will need to agree to the forum rules, which govern posting in the forum. There is also a forum guide. You will also need to provide a real email address which will not be disclosed to other than site officers. The address is required to enable the site's personnel to communicate with you if necessary, for example, in the event of your forgetting your password or wishing to make any changes to your registered details.

Once you are registered, you may log in on this page or the forum index page. Logging into this site will have the effect of logging you into the parent site so that you may, for example, lodge issues, comments or votes on the qa site, subscribe to mailing lists and edit the wiki.
== Site development ==
Further developments will include more links in the sidebar of this page and a dedicated links page. There may also be provision for members and groups of members to have blogs on the site. A privacy policy statement will be added to the site.
== Site administration ==
Management of the site is under the control of a management group of volunteers. Any member of the site may join the management group by applying on the user groups page of the forum. By joining the management group, you become eligible to hold office and to participate in elections of the board and other decisions made by the group. The group hopes to provide access to training materials and opportunities for its members.

By joining the group, you also agree to the management charter. The group has delegated administration to a board of directors. The board has primary responsibility for appointing web masters, administrators and moderators from the members of the management group.

User:Fossy

2007-09-06T10:28:24Z

Fossy: /* testing creation */

Don't anyone dare edit this page.
== testing creation ==

[[/home page|home page]]

'''[[/First draft|First draft]]'''

'''[[/sandbox|Sandbox]]'''

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T09:23:36Z

Fossy: /* The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

:They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

:I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

:admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

:Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

::The site page about content should not be in the charter.

::Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''We need more wiki pages'''. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::'''I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page'''. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

:Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

:<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

::Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
::[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::'''The charter needs to say''' that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

:::The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

:::The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

:::That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
:::Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

:::The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

:::<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T08:38:32Z

Fossy: /* From the oo.o site use page */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

[new post]

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

[new post]

I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

new post

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

'''We need more wiki pages'''. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

[new post]

'''I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page'''. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T08:37:45Z

Fossy: /* From the oo.o site use page */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

[new post]

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

[new post]

I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

new post

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

We need more wiki pages. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

[new post]

I've run off the beginnings of text for a home page. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T08:37:11Z

Fossy: /* From the oo.o site use page */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

[new post]

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

[new post]

I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

new post

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

We need more wiki pages. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

[new post]

I run off the beginnings of text for a home page. I suggest that a home page of some degree of detail is the minimum we should aim for by the beginning of the Conference in 13 days' time. Rather than clog up this page with more verbiage, I've put it up on [http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddvrk47_45t7spx3 Google] whence TerryE can copy it to a wiki page. I don't see us having other pages ready for linking in the text.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 10:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T07:58:06Z

Fossy: /* From the oo.o site use page */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

[new post]

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

[new post]

I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

new post

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

We need more wiki pages. One each for the above draft, text for the home page, forum rules, a welcoming email, a forum guide. I suppose they should all be together. If I feel well enough, I'll put some proposals on the private board and TerryE can add them as pages to his wiki user site. I'll "borrow" from openfree.org and other sources; I feel well enough for that.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:58, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T07:37:15Z

Fossy: /* Role of Ombudsman */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

[new post]

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

[new post]

I agree with Drew that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 09:37, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

new post

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T07:35:35Z

Fossy: /* The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

new post

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.
Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T06:34:34Z

Fossy: /* Establishing the charter and group */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

new post

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.

I agree with you (DJ) that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T06:33:25Z

Fossy: /* Merging the streams */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

--- new post [by a person who is much better informed :wink:]

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

testing that nowiki code:
<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.

I agree with you (DJ) that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T06:32:26Z

Fossy: /* Membership of the group */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

--- new post [by a person who is much better informed :wink:]

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

testing that nowiki code:
<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.

I agree with you (DJ) that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T06:31:58Z

Fossy: /* Membership of the group */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

--- new post [by a person who is much better informed :wink:]

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

testing that nowiki code:
<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.

I agree with you (DJ) that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T06:30:13Z

Fossy: /* The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

--- new post [by a person who is much better informed :wink:]

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

testing that nowiki code:
<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

[new post]

There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.

I agree with you (DJ) that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

User talk:TerryE/Draft Constitution2

2007-09-06T06:27:59Z

Fossy: /* The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated */

==Role of Ombudsman==
I have a question about this "Overseer" role. Where do they come from and how are they selected?

They are elected by the members of the management group from among their own number. DJ makes the point that the members of the group can act as overseers. As long as they have access to records and their availability for that task is made known, I agree.

== Establishing the charter and group ==
Regarding the section 'Date' and the question who will vote this in.

IMO, it is the same group of people as those currently registered at the private forum. Regarding that, the PM I sent out the other day garnered a number of PM and direct emails to me. Counting the folks that are actively discussing the issues on the forum and the PM / emails we now have 13 of the 19 individuals ( names suppled to me from James ) as voicing an agreement that we move forward with this.

I would perhaps include in the charter, as an amendment perhaps the names of the first board, and admins. Then send another PM to the group ( perhaps grown now, so need new list from James ) for approval. Perhaps call this the interim board, and setup a full vote by the members say 3 or 6 months hence to ratify this initial vote?

--- new post [by a person who is much better informed :wink:]

admins and moderators will be known by their forum names. Those are not names you'd normally use in a charter. If the board or one of its executives / directors has responsibility for appointing forum officers, it's a simple matter of adding them to the appropriate groups and making sure they have the benefit of the permissions they need.

Preferably, there should be formal records of appointments.

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:56, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

testing that nowiki code:
<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

== Merging the streams ==

I have merged the streams, but have not addressed Drew's question about Admins and Mods
I think these folks will answer to the Dir of IT and the Dir of Content respectively.
Security hackers or checkers, such as me would answer to the President or Chair.
Best practice of not putting the CSO under the CIO.

Yes, of course, everybody can talk to anybody about anything, because we are really all friends here. This must be maintained or much of the fun will drain out.

-Wolf
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:48, 5 September 2007 (CEST)
:Wolf, if you add <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to your post you will see that this resolves to a signature — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 03:58, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

A fresh look is required, I think. Perhaps Drew could ask his friend Alex to make the final decision. After all, Sun wants this signed and sealed in time for the Conference. Odd that Sun should be the one doing the hurrying.

The site page about content should not be in the charter.

Submit to the legal eagle - yes?

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:36, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

== Membership of the group ==

I think that anyone who is registered on the site is ''eligible'' to join the group, but we should have some sort of election / selection process to eliminate SPAM entrants. [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 04:42, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

It would be like any other (forum) group. You apply to join. The (forum) administrator presumably has to admit you and can check your credentials when doing so. A similar procedure to the formation of the user group on 8daysaweek.

[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:51, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

== Content of ''the Site'' ==

I feel that we need a statement that all content of the site should be made under GPL OD licence. The constition should state this and therefore "Decisions on access to records of decisions of ''the board'' by persons other than ombudsmen shall be made by the board." is in conflict with this. All decisions should be public. — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 05:00, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

:'''GPL-ing'''. This is a great idea, however a copyright might be wiser. Don't really want to give editing rights to official proceedings, but do want to make it very accessible.
:[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 16:50, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

::There is a difference between open access and right to plagiarise and that of fraudulently re-editing. We prevent the second by signing agreed minutes — [[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:14, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

:::Minutes made available to the public on a locked forum seems plenty secure enough. Someone is designated the scribe and maintains the postings, the attendees / participants have a chance to verify the accuracy. Seems simple enough @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

Licensing for the overall site content? What would you think of the Creative Commons Attribution license. See [http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?license_code=by-sa&wiki=true&lang=en:here for reference] looking at the human readable page might be a bit misleading, you need to have a peek at the actual text, legalize. @[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 08:22, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

==== From the oo.o site use page ====
[http://www.sunsource.net/TUPPCP.html]

4. THINGS YOU SUBMIT TO THE SITE. This Site offers many opportunities for You to contribute Materials to the community on this Site. In addition to the other terms found here, the following terms apply to any Submissions made by You ("Your Submissions").

a. You Take Responsibility for Your Submissions. You warrant that You have all rights needed to provide Your Submissions to the Hosts for posting to the Site in accordance with these Terms and to grant the licenses set forth in sections 4.b and 4.c. You agree that You will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that Your Submissions: (i) do not infringe, misappropriate or violate the intellectual property rights or privacy interests of others; (ii) are not confidential or trade secret information, or subject to Your privacy interests; (iii) are not inaccurate, harmful, obscene, pornographic, defamatory, racist, or otherwise objectionable to a reasonable User; (iv) do not violate any law, ordinance, or regulation of any country, state or locality. YOU AGREE THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SUBMISSIONS AND THAT YOU, AND NOT THE HOSTS, ARE LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THEM.

b. Source Code Submissions. You agree that any source code You contribute to a Project will be submitted under, and subject to, the license posted for that Project. If no license is posted, You agree that Your Submission will be governed by the '''New BSD License''', which terms can be found at [http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php]. To the extent there is a conflict between those licenses (including the New BSD License) and these Terms, those licenses will take precedence over these Terms, and you agree to be bound accordingly. You acknowledge that You are responsible for including all applicable copyright notices and licenses with Your Submissions, and that You assume the risks of failing to do so, including the potential loss of Your rights to Your Submissions. ''This gives people the right to put hard-copyrighted blogs on the site and we have plausible deniability''

c. Other Submissions. This Section 4.c applies to all Submissions other than source code Submissions contributed to a Project. The Hosts do not claim ownership of Your Submissions. However, in order to fulfill the purposes of this Site, You must give the Hosts and all Users the right to post, access, evaluate, discuss, publish, disseminate and refine Your Submissions. In legalese: '''You hereby grant to the Hosts and all Users a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and fully sub-licensable right and license under Your intellectual property rights to reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use Your Submissions (in whole or part) and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the obligation to retain any copyright notices included in Your Submissions. All Users, the Hosts, and their sublicensees are responsible for any modifications they make to the Submissions of others.'''

i. Private Projects. With respect to a Project that is designated as "Private," the preceding license is limited to Users who have access to the Project, and such rights may only be sublicensed to other Users with authorized access to the Project.

d. Moral Rights. You agree that with respect to any "moral" or equivalent rights (including, without limitation, rights of attribution, integrity, disclosure, and withdrawal) You hereby: (i) assign such rights to Hosts, (ii) waive such rights and (iii) agree never to assert such rights or to institute or maintain any action against Hosts relative to any such rights in Your Submissions. To the extent that such rights cannot be assigned or waived by operation of law, You grant to Hosts, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable and worldwide license to fully exercise all such rights akin to ownership, with rights to sublicense through multiple levels of sublicensees and further, You consent to Host's use sufficient to allow Hosts to exercise the rights granted herein.

e. Projects May Have Other Contributor Agreements. Some Projects are governed by their own terms regarding Submissions and may require You to sign an agreement (such as a Contributor Agreement) assigning and/or licensing Your rights in Your Submissions. In all such cases, and to the extent there is a conflict, the terms of those Projects' agreements take precedence over these Terms, including without limitation Sections 4b. and 4c.

f. Privacy. You consent to the collection, processing and storage by the Hosts of any personal information provided by You in accordance with the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, which is available at http://www.sun.com/privacy. You agree to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and the terms of Sun's Privacy Policy, with respect to any use by You of any personal information in connection with this Site. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if you choose to participate in an open source or community source process on this Website - whether by contributing code, participating in mailing lists, signing a contributor agreement or sending an e-mail - your participation is public and your privacy cannot be protected to the extent that you provide personal information such as your e-mail address, username or full name. To the extent that you contribute code, information, articles or other material to this Website containing personal information, the Hosts cannot protect the privacy of such personal information and such material may be provided to others under the Terms of Use, contributor agreement and/or applicable licenses.
[[User:Saphil|Saphil]] 17:18, 5 September 2007 (CEST)

== The Roll Hierarchy seems too complicated ==

The constitution current defines:
* the group
* the site
* volunteer
* (anyone registered with the site)
* (founding members)
* officers
* executive
* the board
* the ombudsman or (is it ombudsmen)
* the Governor
* the President of the Group (who may not be the Governor)
* the Director of IT
* the Director of Publicity
* Director of Funding
* Director of Content
* Ombudsman's Office.

This seems awfully convolved, and it isn't at all clear who is actually responsible for what; when can general members flex their muscles and in what way; and to what level can the executives ignore them.

I think we need to start off with: the site, registered member, volunteer, founding volunteer, executive, ombudsman. After that I run out of steam, but being pragmatic I think that we should also differentiate the roles: guest, registered member, moderator, administrator, system administrator.

I feel that we should acknowledge that in the first 6-12 months we are in foundation phase, where we will unilaterally resolving catch-22s and therefore have start-up appointments but beyond that being a founding member confers absolutely no rights in itself.

[[User:TerryE|TerryE]] 02:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

I think we've ended up with some duplications because of the merger. I see 3 board members as plenty but, hey, 5 is a good number 2. I see the board appointing other officers and also deciding who on the board does what. The less detail in the charter, the more freedom and flexibility.

Oversight by the volunteers generally would occur by two of them calling a poll on some matter. Surely the management group should have its own area in the forum for discussion of issues that arise from time to time. I believe in keeping things as informal as possible initially because experience will teach the team what works best.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>[[User:Fossy|athos]] 06:19, 6 September 2007 (CEST)<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Regarding Volunteers and Founding Volunteers: I don't really see any need for this distinction.
[[User:DrewJensen|Drew]] 07:34, 6 September 2007 (CEST)

--- [new post] <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>
There is no need. The charter is enacted by the founding members of the site. Those are they who reply to your email and vote 'yes' to the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The charter needs to say that at the same time as its adoption, the founding members elect individually whether to join the volunteers group.

The volunteers group (once established) elects its board consisting of executives / directors. Alternatively, the founding members decide the first board at the same time as adopting the charter and the hosting arrangement.

The directors appoint the webmasters, forum administrators and moderators.

That's it. I'd leave it to the directors to decide how they divide responsibilities amongst themselves. In the absence of division, they must decide by majority vote amongst themselves.

I agree with you (DJ) that we don't need an overseer / Ombudsman. The latter term is overblown for a website management situation.

Thereafter, the board or any director can call a poll. Any two or more volunteers can jointly call a poll.

The volunteers have right of access to all records and information and are the only persons who may be appointed to any site office.

<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:Fossy|athos]] 07:46, 6 September 2007 (CEST) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>