Hi @tjhietala,
that decision was widely debated (and justified) back in the day. For starters & reference, see here for the public aspects:
Since conduct and business practices of a TDF member where scrutinized, the previous board decided to keep the details of that debate members-only though. You are a TDF member, so likely you will have received my email about that on Nov 17th, 2022.
At issue was, what me and others in this thread have tried to illustrate with those allegorial book shop stories:
- someone earning money with the complementary good of a free product is likely in a CoI
- someone trying to partner with companies, who benefit from a better free product is likely in a CoI
- it does seem invalid to assert ‘I just wanted more free giveaways’ as a defense for a behaviour that harmed an organisation (whose 2nd objective is the support of a sustainable, independent and meritocratic community)
I hope that answers at least a few of your questions. Beyond that, it would be great, if you and others would hold those who started this topic about a largely imaginary problem to the same standard: there are quite a few questions unanswered up-thread.
With all the outrage here, what seems additionally curious is the notable absence within the current BoD, of minimal standards to register & make transparent personal interests. While during the previous board, the minutes started with a list of directors with an interest, split by agenda items, that habit seems to have stopped.
Which is a problem IMHO, when for example discussing and voting on a budget, which among other things contains the salary of the husband of one of the directors; potentially increases the staff size, such that more favourable labour laws apply for another director who’s himself an employee; and adds or dissolves a number of budget items, over which staff-directors had discretion to spend. It is worth stating, that the BoD Conflict of Interest Policy - frequently quoted in arguments against previous board members - in section 5 requires the sort of disclosures I’m missing above.
I’m sure that the current BoD members have the best interest of TDF in mind (just like the previous board had). But for making progress, looking backwards & trying to find fault is perhaps less helpful, than tackling the many unresolved issues & shortcomings in front of us. I’m still hopeful we can jointly knock a number of them down though, during this board term!
Best, Thorsten