The bod/directors mailing list has been setup several board terms ago. I would need to look up who was in the board when that was decided. However, the notion that the board also needs private space to discuss is something I’ve heard repeatedly and recently, from various people. I remember what big debate it was back in the day to admit the MC into private board meetings, for that very same reason.
Looking at board motions from earlier this term, like the payment of a legal invoice, I am not sure if such motions actually help the community to understand things. I received various questions, like “who was involved”, “what happened” and “who recommended that lawyer”, nothing of which is answered in this very motion. I think that’s for good reasons, to not expose people, but it also means that the fact that the motion was in a board meeting does not automatically result in any better transparency. The details of that vote are on the secret mailing list.
I spent some effort to publish old minutes and decisions. However, I either redacted or did not publish at all when individuals were concerned.
We also have a set of documents in the, to stay with the term, secret Nextcloud. Some of that is hard to be published given the confidential nature, but others are proposals, e.g. for business entities throughout the years, or other correspondence sent to TDF’s bodies. I didn’t publish these to not expose anyone or share maybe premature ideas with the public.
I am all for transparency, but I think we need to keep the balance. I’ve agreed previously that some votes could have been done in public straight away. However, as we see with some examples, like
a public discussion doesn’t necessarily lead to more interaction either.
I’ve not seen anyone yet consenting that TDF (or any of its employees and contractors) can publish any documents and any correspondence that person sent to the secret mailing list, directly or in copy, or such correspondence that concern that person, for past and future…