[MEI-L] future MEI Board

Wed Jul 9 19:45:06 CEST 2014

Hi Christine, everyone,

I can see that there are good reasons why institutional representatives should only have an advisory function, so I'm with you on that one.  I can even see how institutional reps could be elected, but I think the institution should have the ability to select its rep by whatever process it feels is appropriate.

I also understand the Board may need to resort to voting on particular issues.  As I read them, the by-laws as currently written allow the Board to organize itself as it sees fit, including the institution of polling or voting, but if others think that should be explicitly stated, I won't object.  But, I don't see what these points have to do with the number of Board members.  When there are 6 elected Board members, institutional reps can still have an advisory function and "regular" Board members can still vote when necessary.

Is there a concern that 6 elected members can't provide proper representation for the community?  Or is there a desire to increase the number of members in order to create more "leadership" positions that could, for instance, make it easier for one to get funding for MEI-related activities?

As we've heard from Don, who has some experience in similar matters, too large a governing body can be cumbersome.  On the matter of representation, I trust the community to elect whomever it feels can best represent it.  I don't believe we should assign board positions to "technical" and "non-technical" categories.  I don't want to discourage participation, of course, but the Board must have a finite number of members -- not everyone can be on it.  BUT, *everyone* can stand for election.

In the interest of compromise, is there a number between 6 and 9, closer to 6 than 9,  :-)  that can be made to work with staggered terms?  I'd happily support that option.

--
p.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mei-l [mailto:mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] On Behalf Of
> Christine Siegert
> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 3:38 AM
> To: Music Encoding Initiative
> Cc: Roland, Perry D. (pdr4h)
> Subject: Re: [MEI-L] future MEI Board
> 
> I also agree that voting might be necessary sometimes and that the
> insitutional representatives should only have an advisory function (they can
> at the same time, be elected, of course). Therefore, I would prefer 9
> members instead of 6.
> All the best,
> Christine
> 
> 
> Prof. Dr. Christine Siegert
> Universität der Künste Berlin
> Fakultät Musik, Musikwissenschaft
> Fasanenstraße 1B
> D-10623 Berlin
> 
> Tel.: +49 (0)30 3185 2318
> siegert at udk-berlin.de
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> From: Laurent Pugin
> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 8:46 AM
> To: Music Encoding Initiative
> Cc: Roland, Perry D. (pdr4h)
> Subject: Re: [MEI-L] future MEI Board
> 
> I also agree with Don that for point 1 we need a voting option (just
> in case). For the same reason, I think that for point 2 we need to
> make clear that institution representatives will be non voting
> members. I can foresee that decisions will be taken by consensus, but
> again, this has to be in place just in case.
> 
> On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Byrd,  Donald A. <donbyrd at indiana.edu>
> wrote:
> > On point 1, aiming for consensus is great, but surely voting will be
> > necessary on occasion, so I think an odd number is preferable.
> >
> > On point 2, I have no opinion.
> >
> > On point 3, I think 6 elected representatives plus institution-appointed
> > representatives is _plenty_ large! ISMIR is a fairly similar organization
> > to
> > I think what we're talking about. I was on the ISMIR Steering Committee
> > until about 2008, with 8 or 9 members, I forget exactly, and that was
> > already a bit cumbersome. And Perry's point about travel $$ makes sense.
> >
> > --Don
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 13 Jun 2014 21:26:34 +0000, "Roland, Perry D. (pdr4h)"
> > <pdr4h at eservices.virginia.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Benni, everyone,
> >>
> >> On point 1 -- I have no preference since the normal modus operandi of
> >> the Board should be to arrive at decisions by consensus, not by
> >> voting.
> >>
> >> Regarding point 2 -- Again, I have no preference, but the role of the
> >> host institution representative should be spelled out.  Since
> >> decisions should be made by consensus, I hesitate to say that the
> >> host institution rep. should be a voting member.  I prefer something
> >> like -- "The host institution representative has the same rights in
> >> the decision-making process of the Board as other members."
> >>
> >> On point 3 -- I do have a preference for 6 elected members plus host
> >> institution-appointed representatives.  I think a 6-member Board can
> >> be more efficient.  Also, if we ever do get to the point of having
> >> resources to do so, reimbursing 6 people's travel expenses is
> >> cheaper.  :-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> p.
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: mei-l [mailto:mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] On Behalf Of
> >>> Benjamin Wolff Bohl
> >>> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 11:16 AM
> >>> To: Music Encoding Initiative
> >>> Subject: [MEI-L] future MEI Board
> >>>
> >>> Dear MEI-L::isteners,
> >>> the current proposal or MEI Community Organization isn't exactly clear
> >>> about how many members the future Board will have. This is due to the
> >>> fact that the discussion in Charlottesville wasn't totally explicit
> >>> about it.
> >>> At the moment there are three main issues that I would like to forward
> >>> to the community:
> >>>
> >>> 1) odd or even
> >>> In general do you prefer an odd or even number of voting board
> members?
> >>>
> >>> 2) Host Institution representative
> >>> In addition to any number of Board members elected from and by the
> >>> community, the proposal grants a seat to one member of every host
> >>> institution, designated by the respective institution. At the moment the
> >>> Academy will be the only Host Institution (Please be aware that this is
> >>> not about Institutional Membership and an institution can only have
> this
> >>> role in MEI on individual agreements with the Board).
> >>> The question connected to this is whether this designated member of
> the
> >>> Board should have equal rights concerning any decision making process
> of
> >>> the board, e.g. the right to vote in such decisions or have advisory
> >>> role only?
> >>>
> >>> 3) Number of elected Board members & terms
> >>> How many elected members should the Board have, and how long
> should
> >>> their terms be?
> >>> In general we decided on staggered/overlapping terms in order to have
> a
> >>> number of Board members be elected every year. The two proposed
> models
> >>> are:
> >>> a) 9 elected members serving for three years each, 3 members will be
> >>> elected each year
> >>> b) 6 elected members serving either for 2 or 3 years each, resulting in
> >>> 3 or 2 members being elected each year
> >>>
> >>> I'd be very happy to hear community opinions on this!
> >>>
> >>> Best wishes,
> >>> Benjamin
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> ***********************************************************
> >>> Musikwissenschaftliches Seminar Detmold/Paderborn
> >>> BMBF-Projekt "Freischütz Digital"
> >>> Benjamin Wolff Bohl
> >>> Gartenstraße 20
> >>> D?32756 Detmold
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Tel. +49 (0) 5231 / 975-669
> >>> Fax: +49 (0) 5231 / 975-668
> >>> E-Mail: bohl at edirom.de
> >>>
> >>> http://www.freischuetz-digital.de
> >>> ***********************************************************
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> mei-l mailing list
> >>> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> >>> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mei-l mailing list
> >> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> >> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Donald Byrd
> > Woodrow Wilson Indiana Teaching Fellow
> > Adjunct Associate Professor of Informatics
> > Visiting Scientist, Research Technologies
> > Indiana University Bloomington
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mei-l mailing list
> > mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> > https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mei-l mailing list
> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mei-l mailing list
> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l