Question 1

Doesn't your board look like a management team too much?

admin · Accepted Answer

I wonder whether a 3-person board of directors is so functional and effective.
The foundation design is a cathedral (from The Cathedral and The Bazaar, by Eric S. Raymond) with just three people on the board.

Yes, it is a team of managers (because we've reserved the term members for the steering L3C).

However, the cathedral is a mischaracterization. In history, there have been numerous successful foundations to support the development and implementation of open-source software that started with a three-person board of directors, including the inventor/benevolent dictator:

The Free Software Foundation (FSF). When it was founded by Richard Stallman in 1985, it had a board of directors with three members.
The Open Source Initiative (OSI). The OSI was founded in 1998 by Eric S. Raymond and Bruce Perens, along with a third initial member, to promote and protect open-source software by certifying licenses and advocating for open-source principles. While the exact composition of the board has evolved, the foundation initially had a small core group of influential members guiding its mission.
Apache Software Foundation (ASF): Founded in 1999, the ASF initially had a small group of individuals instrumental in its creation. The initial board included several key contributors to the Apache HTTP Server project, though the specific number of members can vary over time.
Python Software Foundation (PSF): The PSF started with a small board in 2001 to support the Python programming language. The initial board of directors was composed of a few key figures in the Python community, including Guido van Rossum, the creator of Python.
Linux Foundation: Although the Linux Foundation (founded in 2000 as the Open Source Development Labs) had a larger initial advisory board, its governing structure initially included a small, focused group of influential members from the open-source community, including Linus Torvalds, who played a significant role in guiding the foundation's early direction.

Question 2

How can I see this differently than a 'Sam Foundation'?

admin · Accepted Answer

The foundation is co-founded by and tailored to its BDFL, Samuel Smith. We do this not because we’re his fans but because we understand that foundations that are disconnected from their original visionaries and gatekeepers in the past were less successful than the ones that managed to keep them happy and on board. Ideally, a BDFL is a two-way commitment.

Question 3

Shouldn't it be a broad board instead of a management team?

admin · Accepted Answer

I believe the structure is too narrow. We need more Board members.

One of our design principles is that we run it like a company, but it IS a board in a legal sense.

It is only reasonable, safe, and logical to first finish things in a small technical team and only then start diversifying.

We'll reverse the question: How do you balance board managers over interest groups and continents? Does it become a political mess quickly?

Question 4

What is the decision-making power of the advisory board?

admin · Accepted Answer

The board selects the voting chair from the advisory board on the main board.

Question 5

What is the use of a pro-bono advisory board?

admin · Accepted Answer

To align ideas and input ideas. One individual, the leader of that advisory board, has decision-making power.

For those who strongly advise against the concept of an advisory board

We would reverse the question:
What if the KERI plan and your concept are incompatible with Sam's wish? How important is it to you to operate as a unit?

The question is whether we need an advisory board with final decision-making power over the foundation at this stage.
For us, it is a clear 'no' to that question. Despite that, we have foreseen the appointment of one person from that advisory board with decision-making power.

The advisory board we envision has decision-making power via its chairman having a seat with voting rights on the board of directors. Based on consensus, they should get on the advisory board first instead of slowing down decision-making and operations by having a (growing) bunch of people with individual interests and agendas that consume valuable time. It doesn't add value or speed up the delivery of the 5Ws at this stage.

Question 6

Why do you need an executive team of managers?

admin · Accepted Answer

The executive team works on operational matters within the envisioned foundation framework. All the roles that are needed are included (anyone can add them if something is missing). Those roles will soon be assigned to functions/persons depending on the phase/scale of the foundation.

Members versus Managers

We think an essential function of the foundation should be to focus on technology, vision, and broad adoption. KERI founder Sam Smith should be there.

We have members of the legal entity, the L3C, and to avoid misunderstanding, we use managers for the foundation, which we run in a professional way but not-for-profit.

Question 7

Why not create a broad board of directors who sufficiently represent the interests of donors?

admin · Accepted Answer

Our version of the foundation won't give way to politicians and talkers, and no one will be able to buy influence. It'll be a "proof of work" organization, not a proof of stake powerhouse.

The interests of donors are represented in other ways:

coopetive design
advisory board with one voting chair on the board
directly funded projects

In this stage, we can't allow roles representing narrower interests to outnumber the votes of the critical roles on the board.

FAQ Archived

Archived (5)

How can I see this differently than a ‘Sam Foundation’?