[Osia-members] My thought: A new approach is needed.

[Bob Birchall]

Hi Mark,
I agree with these comments. The other significant outcome of the meeting
that I would add to your list was the expression of goodwill from Linux
Australia, manifested both in the number of present and past councillors
who attended our meeting and in the sympathetic and encouraging words of
Cathy Reed and others.

Dave Kempe pointed out to me this morning that over 400 organisations paid
for their people to attend Linux Conf this week. This is the open source
industry. Its strong, though diverse. If OSIA is to speak for it, we need
better mechanisms than we have currently for harvesting opinions and
resources.

My take on our situation is this:
- any future for OSIA lies in closer collaboration with LA;
- there is a widely held view that ongoing representation to government is
necessary, in some matters vital and urgent;
- we have neither the troops nor money to continue as a public company;
- past and present members do not perceive value in the existing structure.

We have an invitation from LA to discussion of what alternative futures
might look like. I think we need to take that up.

My opinion.

Bob Birchall
Calyx

On 26 Jan 2018 11:56 AM, "Mark Phillips" <
mark.phillips at automatedtestsystems.com.au> wrote:

> The following points are based on my recollections of the SGM. They may be
> incorrect and incomplete and if so please correct me in any replies.
>
> Also feel free to forward this email to any participates expected on
> Saturdays board meeting.
>
>
>
>    1. There is approximately 25 financial members of the OSAI. There were
>    approximately 7 attendees and I think 3 proxies. ( plus myself and the LA
>    representatives)
>    2. There are 6 sponsors. Did any of these sponsors attend or supply
>    proxies for the SGM?
>    3. Jack and Rod expressed their wish to stand down, Jack has stated he
>    would be interested in a limited company secretary role. Alexar is only
>    interested in a caretaker role and will resign from the board when
>    additional directors are appointed.
>    4. There was only a single EoI for the role of OSIA director.
>    5. Kathy, Linux Australia (LA), mentioned that volunteer support is
>    diminishing within LA
>    6. David's comment that OSIA  has succeeded and therefore is no longer
>    relevant
>    7. Ron's comment regarding putting OSIA into hibernation for about 8
>    months.
>    8. Jacks comment regarding Government agencies approaching OSIA in the
>    past.
>
>
> So, while I thought that it could be possible to resurrect OSIA given
> three board members and my commitment expressed through my EoI, I no longer
> think this is viable long term. There is no significant support from either
> the membership, both financial and non-financial in the short term let
> alone the long term. and I would go as far as to say there is no
> significant support from OSIA's sponsors. In kind support is not what is
> currently needed. Also just looking at the OSIA's attendees at the SGM
> there is no next generation.
>
>
> The governmental/public profile support generated by Jack's time on the
> board has been damaged over the last 12 months. This can only be further
> damaged if OSIA goes into a hibernation period  as suggested by Ron. If
> OSIA is going to be resurrected now, it will be difficult enough to regain
> this forgone credibility with the various government. In this circumstance,
> as an outsider, I would be seeing that OSIA is not a industry body but a
> personality driven body. If there is the correct person available then the
> body thrives, if there is not, then the influence of OSIA dies. This is not
> to say that strong leaders are problem, I'm saying that it is this
> in-between times that could suggest that the OSIA is not backed by industry
> but by persons with a specific interest.
>
>
> I think David's comment (6) is wrong. Open Source has not "won" it has
> become somewhat accepted. There will always be issues that will be
> detrimental to Open Source that should be fought on all levels. Two recent
> examples are the resurrection of the TPP in Australia and the changes to
> net-neutrality in the states. There is also privacy concerns and concerns
> regarding open standards. These sorts of fights are never won. Individual
> battles are won but the war is ongoing. Vested interests will always try
> and assert control to their benefit. OSIA must be continually on guard for
> this sort of influence and oppose it where it can. So no I do not think
> open source has won if it ever can.
>
> It is my opinion that continuing long term support for OSIA in it's
> current form does not exist. Therefore a better mechanism for long term
> commitment and thus viability for the ideals of OSIA, independent of
> personalities, needs a thorough investigation.
>
>
> Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> Osia-members mailing list
> Osia-members at lists.osia.com.au
> https://lists.osia.com.au/listinfo/osia-members
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osia.com.au/pipermail/osia-members/attachments/20180126/b12a2c21/attachment-0001.html>