From 62e4befd411e5ea03d5eefb0561f2ee846d54f03 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ian Kelling Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 23:09:25 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] deal with gap in narrative --- petition.md | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) diff --git a/petition.md b/petition.md index 91ff182..45c1e4b 100644 --- a/petition.md +++ b/petition.md @@ -41,34 +41,44 @@ OpaVote allows results to be published directly to participants. Instead of using this built-in transparency feature, OSI downloaded the ballot data, removed three candidates, altered voting preference numbers for remaining candidates, and [published the altered -voting results.]((https://opensource.org/blog/announcing-the-new-directors-of-osi-board)) - -**OSI justified its intervention by citing a new requirement: that candidates sign a board agreement.** -However, this requirement was introduced *after* voting had concluded -but *before* the results were announced. The three excluded -candidates—Richard Fontana (a former OSI director), Bradley Kuhn, and -Bentley Hensel—were not named in OSI’s announcement, but their removal -was evident from the published data. - -Fontana and Kuhn's platform aimed for significant changes to OSI. In a -seemingly smaller change, it sought to revise a clause in the board -agreement requiring directors "support publicly all Board decisions," -which they viewed as overly broad. In previous years, there was a -possibility for candidates to discuss such agreements with the board -after being elected. In 2025, that opportunity was eliminated by the -sudden imposition of a post-voting deadline. Hensel, by contrast, -appears to have simply missed the short window to respond. +voting results.](https://opensource.org/blog/announcing-the-new-directors-of-osi-board) + +**OSI had no valid justification for altering the ballot data.** But we +must examine it. In OSI's own words: "Two were ineligible +as they did not sign the current board agreement; one returned the +signed agreement after the deadline passed." However, the requirement +for candidates to sign the board agreement was introduced *after* voting +had concluded but *before* the results were announced. Up until then, +signing was only required if and when a candidate was appointed to the +board. + +**Why didn't they sign?** + +* Benley Hensel was unable to respond within the surprise 47 hour + deadline. +* Richard Fontanta and Bradley Kuhn had publicly raised concerns about a + clause in the agreement that restricted their speech, even after their + board service ended and they sought clarification before signing. [*LWN* OSI election -coverage](https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/1014603/ac0cfc0a74755501/) -noted that "A cynical person might conclude that the last-minute -requirement to sign the agreement was to disqualify one or both because -they would have won otherwise; and that the OSI leadership was unwilling -to have even a minority number of board members who might seek to steer -the ship in a different direction." - -We do not endorse any particular candidates or policy positions, but we -acknowledge these serious concerns. +coverage](https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/1014603/ac0cfc0a74755501/) went +into much more in depth and based on many details not covered here, it noted +that "A cynical person might conclude that the last-minute requirement +to sign the agreement was to disqualify one or both because they would +have won otherwise; and that the OSI leadership was unwilling to have +even a minority number of board members who might seek to steer the ship +in a different direction." + +This petition does not endorse any particular candidates or policy positions, but +we acknowledge these serious concerns. + +OSI admitted the new requirement was meant to prevent Fontana and Kuhn +from advancing further without signing the agreement as is. OSI has the +right to set expectations for board members, and there are a wide +variety of reasons why OSI might decide that a candidate is not a good +fit for the board. Conversely, a candidate learns a lot about the board +as they go, including after joining the board and there are many reasons +they might decide that the board is not a good fit for them. ## Why This Matters -- 2.30.2