Re: [chairs] Individual members representation?

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Eduardo,

I agree with all points.  I think perception is an issue and certainly
external groups when reviewing our board at times may take 
away conclusions that are certainly not reflective of what we may
wish.  We also know from experience that organizations around
us have some history of board interactions that may 
have been mitigated by independent participation.  But as you
point out - nothing is guaranteed - you have to first establish
a culture and a baseline of behaviours - and certainly I was
not trying to infer anything about the current or past board(s).

As an organization I think one of our strengths is introspection
and striving to do better.  We've learned much the last couple
of years, and positive changes have occurred, and we are
definately much better at doing what we do.

I really don't know if an independent member can add more
to the OASIS board - and what challenges that person may
face - or indeed what their role would be seen as - and if they
would represent some consituency within our members, but I felt 
that being so - the question was worth asking!  

I believe I'm also right in saying that while an independent member
can run for any OASIS position, they have to be nominated
by a member company first.  

Also - in mentioning ISO - member TCs are starting to submit
their specifications to ISO and that may raise questions about
the future for specifications and the process they mature
through.

And maybe we do not want to infer in any case that there is
any meaningful difference between individual members and
anyone else anyway.  For instance I personally resent 
government trying to measure ethnic differences in society,
since that just perpetuates the notion that there might be
differences in the first place that can be used as excuses
for heck knows whatever instead of solving the real 
problem directly!?!  

After all our purpose here is to build great standards and
specifications and it may just be a case of it ain't broke
so don't fix it.  But conversely, as an organization OASIS
is very different in position and membership than it was
two years ago - in all positive ways - that show the original
vision was well founded, but are we ensuring that given 
those changes that the equitable balance is sustained?

Thanks, DW