Originally published at: 2026 OSI Elections Update - Open Source Initiative
Pausing the 2026 Board Election Cycle to Improve How OSI Selects Directors and Hears the Community
Regarding the administration of the last OSI board election, I noticed a few minor procedural fixes, but at least in my understanding, I did not see any major issues that would have affected the outcome. I think the staff carried out their duties in good faith.
If there was a root cause behind the confusion, it may be that what the Board is responsible for, and what it is meant to do as a team, was not sufficiently shared with either candidates or voters. The OSI Board, as the governing body of the corporation, bears oversight and ultimate responsibility for finance, legal matters, HR, and key organizational policies. It is not a place for day-to-day community operations, nor a vehicle for carrying out individual agendas. Yet some candidates and some of the election-related discussions seemed to reflect that this premise was not fully understood or shared.
From the community’s perspective, OSI’s core work is carried out by the Executive Director and staff through their programs, along with public discussion and the license review process. The Board’s role is not to execute these activities, but to oversee them. Making this division of roles and the corresponding expectations clearer should directly contribute to rebuilding trust.
It is also worth noting that OSI is not structured as a membership organization under its bylaws, and directors are ultimately appointed by the Board. While the current process appears intended to incorporate community input, its outward form is easy to interpret as a conventional “election,” which can invite misunderstanding.
If OSI keeps a similar mechanism going forward, I believe the following should be enforced at a minimum:
- Communicate clearly that directors are ultimately appointed by the Board.
- Require, at the point of candidacy, a demonstrated understanding of the scope of a director’s duties and what directors should not do, including a written agreement and pre-checks.
As a community member, I want to keep speaking candidly when needed. In that sense, I am probably better suited to constructive critique from outside the Board than to serving in a formal role like a director. I respect the current Board, and I hope OSI continues to improve.
1 Like
Hello @shujisado ,
Maybe this presentation can give you some insight of the proceedings, if you haven’t seen it already.