10C) Discussion: Revisiting the Public Availability of Online Meeting... - Hal Bond

[Michael von Keitz]

Discussion here.

[Hal Bond]

Dear Governors - I think many of us were a little gun shy last year when we wanted to keep our deliberations private. I believe it would be much simpler to go public with our comments and let our GL's morph into a bloggish narrative.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Anything which increases transparency for the members should be encouraged. Let the light shine in!

[Bob Gillanders]

Dear Governors - I think many of us were a little gun shy last year when we wanted to keep our deliberations private. I believe it would be much simpler to go public with our comments and let our GL's morph into a bloggish narrative.

I agree. It seems silly now to go thru the exercise of preparing minutes of meetings when the entire text of the meeting can be archived online. Why burden our secretary with this unnecessary task?

[Christopher Mallon]

Certainly with the AGM being public it seems silly for lesser meetings to be private. If there was anything needing to be discussed privately it could be done elsewhere (ie on the regular Governors board).

I'm also willing to consider the intermediate step of making it public at the conclusion of the meeting, if others are more comfortable with that.

[Ken Craft]

I support making our deliberations public, as I have since the start of these online meetings. I am glad to see other people now championing this transparency.

[Bob Armstrong]

I also have always felt the meetings could be open, just as this AGM is open. Glad to see the review of this issue.

I'd vote for a motion that the quarterlies to be open to the public ( no posting ), as is being done in the 2012 CFC AGM.

Bob