[Osia-members] AGM and Stepping Away

[Jack Burton]

On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 21:22:22 +1100
Aimee Aficionado <aimee at aficionado.tech> wrote:
> Sorry to have left this for so long, sometimes life is what happens
> to us when we are busy making other plans, as someone once said.

Thankyou Aimee Maree for sharing your parting thoughts with us on your
retirement from the board.

Your thread did rather get hijacked by the emergence of the notice of
AGM delivery issue -- not your fault, but it's good that your post
acted as a catalyst to bring the issue to everyone's notice just in
time -- and naturally we've all been focussed on that, and on the
matters before the AGM itself since then.

I'm replying now mostly to ensure that your thoughts don't just get
lost to the sands of time.

> Due to unforeseen events this year I had to step away from my duties
> within OSIA around midyear, which has sadly seen me unable to
> participate in this years work. This has meant that my ability to be
> able to add to OSIA this year has been frankly diminished and left me
> in a position where I am unsure about my time commitments over the
> coming year. It pains me very much to have stepped away from OSIA
> after having built up so much work in the previous years with the
> team, I felt that we where in a good place this year to grow on the
> great success of recent government submissions and I also feel that
> the sentiment is still there and can still be built upon by the next
> board.

Your contribution was noted (together with the contributions of other
retiring directors) in a formal vote of thanks at the AGM -- full text
will be available when the draft minutes come out.

In the meantime, I'd like to take this opportunity to recognise on-list
some of the key areas in which Aimee Maree has contributed to OSIA's
success in years gone by:

* was an early member of the OSIA TPP Committee (from 2012);
* three years service on the OSIA board:
  - director of public policy (Commonwealth), 2015/16;
  - director without portfolio, 2014/15 & 2016/17;
* led the web refresh project during its final term (2014/15);
* lead author of OSIA's initial submission to the Productivity
  Commission's Inquiry into IP Arrangements (Nov 2015);
* lead author of OSIA's submission on the Commonwealth
  whole-of-government shared & common services programme (Feb 2016)

I'm sure everyone here will join me in thanking you, Aimee Maree, for
your substantial contribution to OSIA over several years and in wishing
you well in all your other ventures.

Speaking of the contributions of retiring directors, it's worth noting
also that last night Daniel Jitnah became OSIA's second longest-serving
director overall, and set the record himself for the longest period of
consecutive service on the OSIA board (7 years).

> In regard to the future of OSIA, well I think that is in the hands of
> the membership, I feel that we had made great success in certain
> areas and I also feel that we have be stagnant. There is a need for
> new energy to be injected so to speak and also for a strategic
> overhaul.

Couldn't agree more.

As was discussed at length among those present last night, there is a
clear & pressing need for OSIA to refocus on its core mission:
influencing public policy relevant to the Australian free & open source
software industry.

Twice in its history OSIA has experimented with deviating from that
mission: on both occasions the result has been a rapid descent into
stagnation & irrelevance.

I sincerely hope that the Jan 2018 SGM will be as effective in righting
that course as the Dec 2010 (Rhodes, NSW) AGM was in its day.

For that we will need hard working, highly competent, motivated,
passionate individuals from within the industry to make a commitment to
delivering just that, by nominating for the 2017/18 board to serve from
the January SGM on.

> I had attempted to lay some ground work and foundations for
> that this year, in regard to restructuring infrastructure and
> documentation collection etc.

That sounds like useful work.

When you have a moment, could you please either:

(a) let me know where to find the outcomes of that work, if it's
already stored on OSIA infrastructure; or

(b) forward me copies so I can add it to the "staff" wiki, ready for the
new board to pick up & run with when they're elected?

Many thanks.

> OSIA has failed I feel in the past to effectively communicate with
> its members

Again, couldn't agree more.

Starting next week, I intend to re-instate the previous practice of
sending regular OSIA updates out to the osia-members@ list.

But the list itself is far from just a broadcast medium: it's real
purpose is to provide all OSIA members with an open forum in which to
raise & debate any issues of relevance to the Australian free & open
source software industry.

For example, OSIA's inovlvement in the ACARA review, the ACIP review,
the NSW ProcureIT review and at least one of the Productivity
Commission inquiries all had their genesis in posts by members (not
directors) to this list.

During my short 7 week term, of necessity the sorts of issues discussed
on the list will tend to be internal OSIA matters.

However I would urge the new board, after the SGM, to foster an
environment in which this list returns to being a vibrant forum for
discussion on all manner of issues (as its predecessor lists were many
years ago), principally on public policy matters.

>, I feel there are some key items needed there:
> 
> 1: all board minutes to be public (as consistent with other FLOSS,
> Open Source boards)

In my opinion, that is a very good idea.

It has been raised before at the board, under the auspices of the "open
governance" item in the OSIA Strategic Plan, with my full support
amongst others, but never became a high priority item.

It is not something I can action during the interregnum as there will
be no board meetings -- such a meeting would just be me talking to
myself, which could be rather embarrassing ;)

Transitioning to a more transparent governance model takes some effort
and a certain level of discipline, but I agree with you that it is a
worthy goal and one that I hope the new board will give due
consideration to in the 2017/18 term, once OSIA has returned to more
acceptable levels of activity.

> 2: online infrastructure that will allow members
> to facilitate in government paper and policy submissions

Again, couldn't agree more -- see the comments made during my final
chairman's address, in the minutes (approved last night) of the 2016
(Sydney, NSW) AGM.

> 3: an updated web presence which is more focused on sharing work with
> the greater community rather then just a brochureware style website

This could well be useful too, depending on the detail and the priority
assigned to it.

But as a word of caution for the new board I will repeat here some of
the best advice that Brendan ever gave me: "above all else, try to avoid
re-designing the website every year".

The web refresh that Anastasia, Tim & you delivered actually added
real value, so was definitely worth the time and effort. But history
(both here & elsewhere) has shown that many others have not.

> 4: opening up membership to individual developers (something that was
> started this year)

This is the only one of your proposals that I would be outright opposed
to.

OSIA is an industry body -- it exists to represent the .au FOSS
industry: to me that means *businesses* (whether sole traders, large
corporates, or anything in between) with a physical presence in
Australia who engage in at least one line of business directly related
to FOSS.

An industry body is not a professional society -- we should leave that
market to the likes of ACS, ITPA, EA, IEEE-CS, ISACA, etc. It's a shame
that there are no professional societies in Australia that focus solely
on FOSS (there used to be two; both folded long ago), but it is *not*
OSIA's role to try to become one.

An industry body is not a community body either -- we should leave that
to those who do it best, and in Australia these days that means Linux
Australia.

It makes no sense whatsoever for OSIA to compete with LA or ACS or any
of the others listed above, for two reasons:

1. The market is too small to support greater competition;

2. By diversifying into areas *outside* of representing the industry,
OSIA would *dilute* its standing, relevance & influence when acting as
an industry body.

Industry bodies, community bodies & professional societies are all
essential & complementary parts of the FOSS (or indeed broader
computing) ecosystem.

But instead of trying to be all things to all men, I believe OSIA should
focus on the one job it's supposed to do -- representing industry --
and do it well, then perhaps *collaborate* with professional societies
and/or community bodies where necessary / relevant, rather than trying
to *become* one of them.

> I will continue to support OSIA and I hope to see it continue into
> the future. The main thing that OSIA has suffered from in all my
> years of involvement with policy submissions as a member and a board
> member is allowing a way to facilitate membership involvement. Policy
> work is not a simple task and is a vast commitment of time, as a
> Volunteer Board it is hard to sustain the effort needed for this work
> by one or two people on a board. The TPP committee was an attempt at
> casting the net wider into the membership for input and interaction
> on policy work. In order to have an affective representation for
> OpenSource Industry in Australia I feel we must have greater
> interaction within our membership and input into policy submissions,
> otherwise we face what we have seen in OSIA which is overload. There
> needs to be a way for greater participation in order for it not to
> fall onto one or two individuals to carry the load.

See above re your points #1 & #2.

<...>
> I think OSIA through the membership together we can seek to
> restructure and refocus OSIA, I would hate to be in a position where
> Australia did not have a body that was representing Open Source in
> policy work I believe that it is highly important as we rush into the
> automation and AI future and with the problems we have seen with the
> likes of robodebt recently. Whether or not OSIA will continue or be
> reborn in a new form or even maybe multiple new forms, I know that we
> as a community will continue the policy work and to ensure that there
> is a voice for Open Source in Australian Government Policy.

Indeed. The purpose of the January SGM (coupled with the fresh call for
nominations, which should be out some time next week) is to embark on
just such a journey.

> “In the midst of chaos, there is also opportunity”

Very true -- although I'd add that that opportunity is most often
realised by *bringing* order to the chaos it was found in ;)

Thanks again for your parting thoughts Aimee Maree -- much appreciated.

I hope that you and your fellow retiring directors will remain active
OSIA members and in time will come to see the new board delivering just
the sorts of things we've been talking about.