{"id":1238057,"date":"2025-03-08T12:34:00","date_gmt":"2025-03-08T17:34:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.prime-wow.com\/?p=1238057"},"modified":"2025-03-08T12:34:00","modified_gmt":"2025-03-08T17:34:00","slug":"open-source-initiative-ai-debate-roils-board-elections","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.prime-wow.com\/?p=1238057","title":{"rendered":"Open Source Initiative: AI Debate Roils Board Elections?"},"content":{"rendered":"
The Open Source Initiative’s Board of Directors election “has become embroiled in controversy…” writes Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols at The New Stack. <\/p>\n

“The real issue is the community’s opposition to the open source AI definition (OSAID), which the organization released last October,” he adds \u2014 but “the election process has been criticized because the OSI has refused to accept the candidacy of Debian developer Luke Faraone, citing a missed application deadline.”
\nFaraone claims they submitted their application around 9 p.m. PST on Feb. 17, while the OSI maintains the deadline was 11:59 p.m. UTC (3:59 p.m. PST) on the same day. <\/p>\n

The dispute has raised a firestorm about the clarity of communication regarding deadlines and time zones. Critics argue that the deadline’s time zone was not clearly specified on the OSI’s public-facing website. Tracy Hinds, chair of OSI, acknowledged this oversight but stated that full members received multiple emails with the correct time zone information. “Everyone who is qualified to run for elections (full members of OSI) received emails with the time zone,” wrote Hinds, in an email to The New Stack. “The public-facing web page did not have the time zone, and we’ve now updated it for clarity going forward. <\/p>\n

“Extending the deadline would be unfair to the other candidates….”
\nOn LinkedIn, Bruce Perens, one of the OSI’s founders wrote, “Open Source Initiative invents rule at the last minute to deny opposition candidate’s nomination for their board election.”
\nThere are three board sets up for election in March, the article points out. “Two well-known figures in the open source world \u2014 Richard Fontana, Red Hat’s principal commercial counsel and a former OSI board member, and [Bradley] Kuhn, policy fellow and hacker-in-residence at the Software Freedom Conservancy \u2014 are running on a joint platform of repealing the open source AI definition.” <\/p>\n

Faraone wrote on his blog that he would’ve had a similar platform (also supporting a repeal of the definition) \u2014 had his candidacy not been rejected.<\/p>\n

\n<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Read more of this story<\/a> at Slashdot.<\/p>\n