 | NixOS Foundation | 474 Members |
| Public room for chatting with the NixOS Foundation Board | 120 Servers |
| NixOS Foundation | 474 Members |
| Public room for chatting with the NixOS Foundation Board | 120 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 27 Apr 2024 | ||
 Maximilian Marx | In reply to @shalokshalom:kde.orgIt's really not “1:1” if people tell you “ we are not the moderation team, go talk to the moderation team if you want to discuss that topic” | 08:34:35 |
 @patka_123:matrix.org joined the room. | 08:37:15 | |
 @mangoiv.:matrix.org | In reply to @withoutwithin:matrix.orgPlease don’t 🥺 | 08:39:49 |
 Arian | I think people have very different views of the board. Personally I don't see them as our community leaders at all and I absolutely don't want them to be. It just doesn't fit NixOS. People have been trying to move it in the direction giving the board more agency and more voice over the years. But that was definitely not a push from eelco. He even pushed against that very explicitly from what I remember. He always saw it as a simple financial host for things. Not a voice or authoritative Shepard of the community as a whole. Just as a legal necessity so that we can pay bills. For a very long time it was just two board members rubber stamping financial report every year and handling invoices and that's it. There wasn't really anything public facing. Heck. Until 2 years ago nixcon didn't have any financial host, structure or plan whatsoever. We didn't even know how to legally charge for tickets. It wasn't affiliated with the foundation at all. We all forgot the drama of misappropriated funds and unclear legal struggles from the nix cons from before 2023? I think the problem is that we cant even agree on what the foundation is supposed to be. And it really changed really quickly over the last year or so. The people demanding more of the foundation in terms of support (coordinate funding from German government and European Union, be VAT host for nixcon) whilst it transforming from an extremely passive minimal foundation just for bookkeeping to a foundation from which people seem to demand a voice of authority is really the core of the whole struggle in my opinion. central questions to me is: does the community want a foundation with a voice of authority and are visible representatives of our Community? All these open letter de facto show that it has been become this without even the board members realizing. Otoh we seem to have board members (like Eelco) who clearly do not want to play that role. I see a conflict there that needs to be resolved. | 08:45:45 |
| Arian | But yeh. Defacto the board currently _is_ the face of the community. So it needs to resolve that internal conflict to give clarity and a way forward /2 cents | 08:46:40 |
| @patka_123:matrix.org | Board choses not to block controversial sponser -> community problems -> ... ? Whatever you like the job of the board to be you can't just ignore things | 08:50:13 |
| Arian | I think we can have a board that is purely a fiscal host. But then people need to accept that the board doesn't form opinions about NixCon. I think the new sponsorship policy is a way to solve that | 08:51:55 |
| Arian | Clear policy on how we choose sponsors as a community. | 08:52:01 |
 @withoutwithin:matrix.org | I don't see the board as that kind of silent fiscal host in how it operates | 08:52:21 |
| Arian | But it used to be for the past decade or so. People often didn't even know that the Foundation existed. It only changed recently. Wanted to add that as context | 08:53:31 |
| @withoutwithin:matrix.org | he who controls the purse strings controls the project | 08:53:45 |
 Jonas Chevalier |
That's very true. Our role is to be the interface between the community and legal/commercial. Not to lead the community. The intention was for the community to self-manage, with minimal intervention from the board to unblock where needed. There is a big mismatch of expectations there, that started happening when we had to weigh on the sponsorship policy. | 08:54:07 |