RE: Bylaws Amendment

On Thu, 2025-07-24 at 01:46 +0100, Zach van Rijn wrote:
> While concerns and discourse about optics, transparency, etc.
> are valid, I attest that--to the best of my knowledge--none of this is
> intentional, and SPI does aim for maximum transparency.

Personally I have absolutely no reason to believe that there is anyone on the SPI Board who doesn't have the most honest and best intentions for the benefit of SPI and Open Source in general.

The concerns I have raised are NOT a belief that anything inappropriate has already happened or is happening now, but rather a wish to ensure that the appropriate guard rails are in place to ensure that this remains the case out into the future.

But what I do believe I am seeing is a lack of good strategy and action around communications. And whilst I appreciate that the board are all volunteers with other commitments on their time, I believe that good communications might actually be the single most important thing the board should focus on in the interests of SPI longevity.