2009/3/17 Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 13:40 -0500, inode0 wrote: >> >> FESCo seems to manage to do most of its business and I believe all of >> its voting in public. So I'm not getting the sense that adding some >> inefficiency and inconvenience to the board in the conduct of some >> part of its business is so insurmountable an obstacle. >> >> How strongly do we believe in transparent governance? Opting out when >> there is a legal or sensitive issue is one thing, opting out because >> being transparent is more inconvenient than the alternative is >> another. > > There is a difference here. The board constantly deals with things of a > nature that can't be made public at the time of the board meeting. > FESCo /never/ has that, as whenever it runs into a legal issue, it gets > bounced up to the board (or just fedora legal directly). Right, I understand that legal matters get bumped up to the board. FESCo also deals privately with non-legal matters that in their judgment are too sensitive for whatever reason to discuss in public so they also need to juggle some. I'm curious and I suspect most of us non-board members don't really understand to what extent the board deals with legal matters. Could you give us a rough estimate of the percentage of time that the board spends in meetings dealing with legal matters? I know it would likely vary greatly, but something of a "typical" meeting. > We are going to make a concerted effort to provide more visibility into > the non-sensitive matters that are discussed at board meetings, but > we'll continue to do the meetings in a phone manner due to the high > bandwidth and better feel for what is being said. Thanks, I appreciate your consideration and efforts in this regard very much. John _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
