Please, whenever we next have a community poll, we should go back to using FOSS software, such as LimeSurvey which we have used in the past. Using non-FOSS software, such as JotForm if I understand correctly, where the source code is not even available for audit is particularly problematic for community surveys. Some language furthering Koha as FOSS and the Koha community in a FOSS environment wherever practical should be in the organisational purpose of any Koha community foundation incorporation papers. FOSS should be the primary reason people choose Koha and we should avoid diluting that message wherever practical. [Previous reply with a minor word order correction is quoted below.] Thomas Dukleth Agogme 109 E 9th Street, 3D New York, NY 10003 USA http://www.agogme.com +1 212-674-3783 ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Re: [Koha] Koha Foundation Vote is open From: "Thomas Dukleth" <kohalist@agogme.com> Date: Thu, May 16, 2024 02:20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Reply inline with a word order correction.] On Wed, May 15, 2024 21:47, Auld, Andrew wrote:
The Koha Foundation proposal vote is now open. You can place your vote on the Koha Community website and there you will also find a link to the proposal and background research. Votes must be placed by 5pm UTC on Friday 14 June. One vote per person please.
If I remember correctly, previous survey software used for voting on Koha community concerns certainly had the principle of one vote per person but allowed vote reconsideration and changing the one counted voted by voting again with a different vote.
In https://ptfs-europe.com/koha-foundation-proposal/ , very little is stated about the intended governance structure of a foundation other than the legally required five member board of directors and two volunteers, and the unstated presumptive necessity that it has to avoid legal conflicts of interest to comply with Open Library Foundation and US non-profit 501c3 rules. For example, there is no statement considering a concern of historic discussions of a possible Koha foundation to geographically federate some input into foundation governance for such an internationally distributed project as Koha to avoid the foundation excessively serving US or Anglo-US interests based on the US location of the foundation other than "in the first instance, to keep the governance light". There is also no historical background explaining that the project had previously organised under Horowhenua Library Trust [HLT], subsequently THT. Upon the dissolution of THT for Horowhenua District Council [HDC] to directly run Horowhenua libraries directly, Koha community assets might have devolved to HDC which had created HLT and then THT as an administrative organisation for local libraries. I do not remember what happened if anything decisive subsequent to "THT and Koha: a new Trust Deed" - https://lists.katipo.co.nz/public/koha/2016-October/046346.html and https://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/THT_and_Koha . The complication at the time was that there was no representative Koha community organisation to which THT or HDC could transfer Koha community assets other than THT which was being dissolved. [...] Thomas Dukleth Agogme 109 E 9th Street, 3D New York, NY 10003 USA http://www.agogme.com +1 212-674-3783