Change in .NET Foundation Leadership #40
Replies: 15 comments 62 replies
-
|
I feel what happened was 'schoolyard bullying'. I will be re evaluating if I want to be associated with this. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@ADefWebserver I thank you for expressing your concerns for Claire. Many of us were talking with Claire about the tone of the comments more than daily. This includes board members and other members of the .NET team. We knew this was getting more heated than we'd normally allow. But, we also knew we were getting valuable feedback when we sifted through the heated comments. We also knew that no matter where we drew the line on moderating these comments, we were going to be wrong. So, we concentrated on supporting Claire. And we're still doing that. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Agreed. The PR wasn't the greatest, but it's definitely not even in the top 10 on the list of issues, which is why I mentioned that it provided a convenient outlet for scapegoating. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I've decided to delete my previous comments. It didn't really feel right to be posting about continued problems in a resignation discussion. What's happened happened, and discussions should happen elsewhere about fixing those problems. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
What I don't understand is why the entire board of the DNF was/is quiet in all of the discussions which have been going on for days. Claire is only one of many members so if anything she should have been supported by the rest of the board or at least the board should have also engaged with the community and provided some re-assurance or some explanations to calm the mood. There was no engagement at all from the DNF board until only Clair issued an apology and even then the DNF board kept quiet and let the thread grow from bad to worse. To me personally it feels like the DNF board let Claire take all the blame on her own by not saying a word. I don't know what is going on behind the scenes, but this feels wrong to me. Even if Claire might have done a mistake surely everyone on the board carries some responsibility for what was going on, so why not address the issues in a joint statement and support each other and share the responsibility? You can always make changes to the board later on, but at least present yourself as a team that stands up for each other to the outside world because that is what real leadership should be like. EDIT: No wonder Claire has resigned. She apologised for a mistake she made in regards to the PR and then addressed some of the other issues too. Irrespective of what people think of her mistake, nobody else joined the conversation and said a sorry too. I'm sure other board members didn't live up to the standard that many members might have expected otherwise we wouldn't be in this mess. So basically in the thread it looked like everyone was piling up on Claire alone and that is simply wrong. It's weak and I don't think this is a get out card for the rest of the board. In fact I wish things would have been handled differently so that nobody would have felt the need to resign - at least no tlike that. EDIT 2: There is no greater teacher in life than making a mistake. If people who make mistakes leave you, then not only do you have to clean the mess yourself, you're also not going to be the person anymore who will benefit from their newly learned wisdom. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
People can learn from other people's mistakes. Part of learning from a mistake is stepping back and letting someone else take over. These do not contradict each other. This in no way means that Claire will never be able to lead the DNF anymore. Does it? There is no actual leaving here.
It's a perfect point to continue to be a community member providing feedback and learning from the mistake made while giving someone else a chance. DNF is supposed to be a community. There are many capable people who can take on the position. There's no need to be married to one person's leadership in a community where many are valued at the same caliber. There's nothing wrong with change. To suggest that this change will not help learn is being blind to all the discussion and great feedback that has come out of this change. I applaud this move on Claire's part. It takes courage to allow someone else to take over when you have made a mistake. Also. Maybe people read or know something that isn't in the post but this choice was made voluntarily by an adult with judgement good enough to be chosen to lead the DNF. Not someone involved in ...
These are professionals that should be responsible for their actions, specially the action of resigning to a leadership position. Otherwise they wouldn't have made it to leadership. To say that this is an incited response is downplaying this person's leadership and professional capabilities. No good leader should break under pressure. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This is disappointing. Claire was a wonderful shepherd of .NET, and I wish this had not happened. As I mentioned previously the issues are structural in nature. I'll codify those issues here, as I've done elsewhere:
But that's demonstrably not true, is it. We've been waiting almost a year for the 'lawyer' (whomever that is) to educate us on this change. There's been no communication on these very important topics; no communication on what it means to 'be a member of the .NET foundation', and no communication on just what role Microsoft plays in the running of the foundation. Who pays the lawyer? Who else does that lawyer represent? Do they or have they ever represented Microsoft in any context? What are the practical effects of -- even though we're using the 'contribution' model -- changing the copyright on all code files to say "(C) 2021 .NET Foundation and contributors?" If that isn't copyright assignment in the eyes of the law; then what is it? Who is the next ED going to be? Does Microsoft appoint them? Does the board? Do they have to be a Microsoft employee? There's a lot of talk about the independence of the .NET Foundation; but we keep coming back to an atmosphere that copies to a T, the risk-adverse, communication-gets-vetted-by-lawyers atmosphere that is Microsoft. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
We will be making the search for the new ED as transparent as possible. As for the change in the contribution model, look for more information coming out early next week. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
So we're listening and we'll keep posting answers and clarifying. This is not the end of the conversation, it's clear we've got several things to address to earn back trust. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'm glad, @shawnwildermuth, that you underlined that it's not ending and solving the issues in the community. This decision should be the first step to show that there is a willingness to explain and solve those issues. I hope that we'll get a transparent explanation with a retrospective on how issues discussed in:
I assume that it wasn't a single person decision to make those ownership transfers. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
We will be doing our best to address all the concerns that have been raised recently. Several members of the board have been speaking with project leads that have raised concerns. If we have missed anyone, please forgive us, and get in touch. To help us move forward, I'd ask that anyone who feels like we are missing something or has concerns that we are not addressing, please reach out here or privately to me or to another board member. I'd also like to invite any project leads that want to help, to volunteer for the new maintainers committee. We need your help, wisdom, and input. We want you to be part of the conversation and the solution. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I really like your idea of "adopt a project"/"buddy system" @robmen, but almost immediately it becomes evident there's a logistical issue here, i.e.: there are more projects than board members. So, what happens to those projects that don't get a "buddy"; do they not get a voice? Or, does a single board member have to handle multiple projects, thus potentially resulting in none of them getting the support they deserve? As for language, maybe we could steal "proposal champion" from the csharplang repo and reformulate to "project champion". |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I would propose a rotation, where the board members spend a certain amount of time with one project (say, 6 months) and then choose another project to "buddy" with. There would likely be rules to encourage picking smaller projects, potentially in areas they are completely unfamiliar with, rather than them just cycling through the larger projects or the same set of projects. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@FiniteReality I like, but where does that leave the other "non-buddied" projects, especially if one of them has an emergency? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I don't really have a solution for that, unfortunately. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Depends on the urgency of the emergency. We do already have the project repo, for public non sensitive support requests Potentially we could have a repository for the new committee too. Guess we need to work that out, advantage with a public repo is that anyone can jump in and assist, but of course not a good place for security/sensitive info. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
In case people reading here hadn't seen Claire's tweet, as she points out here this change doesn't affect her role in Microsoft. She's focusing all her work time on the .NET PM team. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@BillWagner I appreciate your comments. I think you understand why what I read I found upsetting. I should have been more clear when I criticized the Dot Net Foundation. I think the "Board" felt I was calling them out. Let me clarify and apologize for that. I meant the other Dot Net Foundation 'Members' such as myself. We need to speak up and say "this is not how we treat each other". I understand why a Board member would be silent in a situation like this because anything they say would be coming from their 'position in the organization'. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thank you. I interpreted that you were concerned that we weren't moderating the conversation as we normally would. I agree, and as a board, we do own that. Again, thank you for your presence here, and speaking for all of us treating each other better. We all appreciate it. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I might be in a minority here but it seems to me that @clairernovotny's (admittedly ill judged) PR is getting an unnecessary amount of flak? Isn't the larger issue the stealth transfer of repo ownership under the guise of "we need admin access to your repo because reasons" ? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I read the core statement at the top as a promise that the team will respond more fully to those concerns in the next week. I think it definitely warrants further discussion and clarification. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
That's a correct interpretation, that's our full intent to hear everyone out, continuously clarify as needed. Heated discussions aside, there's also been a lot of constructive and actionable feedback from the community. And for that we're thankful. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Claire, You are Refit, you are the life and blood of that project so we'd love for you to continue being its main maintainer. I know it being part of the ReactiveUI org makes that ambiguous but it's your project really IMO. If you feel there are too many hard feelings over managing it happy to help out any way there as well. Whatever you prefer just reach out. I'm not sure if this is the right venue for making this suggestion or not, but yeah. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Why does it matter that the project is a part of ReactiveUI anyway? GitHub is flexible enough that she can have full control of Refit without having unnecessary permissions on other projects in ReactiveUI. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Essentially due to her apology she said she'd step away if the maintainers asked. I don't feel comfortable taking away any projects from her nor does anyone else on the project. Worth noting that Claire has taken up this offer. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This isn't fair to @clairernovotny, making her resign. That doesn't solve anything. Majority didn't ask her to do that. They only wanted a heartfelt apology and they got it. Why is this being blown out of proportion? Also, @clairernovotny I'm so sorry that you had to go through this. I know some of them were really mean but please don't take this to heart. Please continue to be part of the foundation. More importantly, please don't let this diminish your love for open source.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I started looking at this after it already blew up. I read that apology and I think some got extra triggered due to some of it being along the lines: we just failed to let you know more clearly what is and will continue to be. Her resignation and the new messaging we are starting to see is hinting that might not be the case anymore. But it is far from over, people are watching closely to see if something does happens. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I haven't seen any evidence that Claire was made to do anything by anyone. Do you have some, or are you merely here to spread FUD and stir up controversy? Claire is an adult, she made a mistake, she has chosen to own that mistake, and she has chosen this path to owning it. I somehow doubt she appreciates the people here who are making her out to be a martyr. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
💯 True that! I always follow, 3 strikes and you're out rule. Claire didn't even get her second chance. What's wrong with you, people? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
From the perspective of the foundation, I believe this is a good start, and I look forward to how things progress from here and I hope that the foundation can grow into something that does help the OSS community. In regards to bullying. I have not see anyone bully Claire. There is not a single person in any of the threads at the time of writing this, that actively targeted Claire as a person. Claire just happened to be the ED of the Foundation, a position at the top. If the whole issue had only been about a PR it most likely would have stayed within the original project. There isn't a single person at the time of writing this, in these discussions that believe Claire had any ill intent in that PR. But the PR topic is a tiny fraction of the issue being discussed. The apology that we expected to contain information about the wider issues we care about only glossed over them and re-inforced something while sweeping it under the rug, and that made people more upset. I don't think a single person in these discussions dislikes Claire, and I believe that every single person is fully aware of her contributions to the OSS community and to projects over the years, and know that it wont stop today. We know shes cares about the community. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Exactly. She made a mistake, which anyone can do, but it was a mistake that involved abuse of power and privilege - when she is in a role as director of the DNF, that implicitly involves power and privilege. Being uncomfortable with her continuing in said role after said mistake is not "bullying" - it's a perfectly rational reaction to what was blatant overreach, and the possibility of additional future transgressions. It's not my place to say whether or not Claire's resignation was the right thing to do, for either her or the DNF; I personally was neither in favour of her staying or going because to my mind, the issues with the DNF that have been aired as a result of her mistake are ones that have little to do with it, and are mostly nothing to do with her. I will say that I respect her courage in stepping down, because it's very obvious she cares about the Foundation and its goals, and when you care about something it's so very difficult to walk away. I sincerely hope that this experience, painful as it must be for her, doesn't discourage her from continuing to contribute to the .NET ecosystem in the future. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I initially sent some of this feedback directly to some directors; however, they suggested that I post this publicly rather than discussing offline with them, so I'll restate here with a bit more background....apologies in advance for the long post. Why Listen to MeFor those that do not know me, I've been a former candidate for the .NET Foundation board, am a project leader of a .NET Foundation project, work with other projects, and serve on other boards outside of the .NET ecosystem. So I not only have direct experience within this organization and some of the factors leading up to the prior days, but I've also seen similar situations arise in different communities, some even more grumpy than this one! The Frustration (Build-Up)As a project leader, I've been continually frustrated by the .NET Foundation and seen others struggling with the same concepts that I've been fighting. Over the past few years, a number of unanswered or partially answered questions have arizen:
It is many of these frustrations that lead me to run for the .NET Foundation Board. I know about many of the things that we can get as benefits from the .NET Foundation by being persistent, and knowing who to bug, and being relentless in nagging. Seeing Claire resign today was a true letdown as, honestly, she is one of the people that helped me answer questions and keep my project moving forward in what were some of the darkest times I've seen in the Open Source world. Having worked in other boards that serve communities of driven individuals, I have seen how missing/incomplete communication and other actions can drive doubt. Driving doubt causes questions, and questions eventually will erupt into chaos if they go unanswered. Over the past few months, especially since the chaos of the elections; missed dates, no communication on the missed dates, and those of us trying to get on the ballot having to resort to Twitter nagging as we had no other way to get in contact with a human that would respond. I knew it was only a matter of time before something caused the hammer to drop and an eruption of emotion. Chaos, Silence, and DisorderThe actions of the last few days show just how much things can erupt when things finally snap. Sadly, Claire, who has done amazing things for almost all of us here, was caught in the crossfire—brought in by an action that wasn't related to any of the other things that have been discussed as of late. I get it, I almost tossed in the towel after my 15th contact trying to find out about elections, but then I remembered the good. Looking at the discussions of today, Claire's resignation is absolutely a loss, but we have started to shine a light on the things that many have known for YEARS. We are at a critical turning point, I believe that the .NET Foundation Board has a tremendous opportunity, but another misstep could easily throw it all way. To this point, I'd like to suggest a number of things that can be done easily and I've love to see more, and more importantly I'LL HELP but I have to know how to do so. Possible Action ItemsCommunication StrategyThere is no real communicated strategy for how project leaders get information that is critical for each other. We have 8+ GitHub repositories with discussions. We have a Project Leader Slack channel, a newsletter, and other communication channels; however, we don't have any single source of information for where/how we get information as project leaders. Additionally, there has not been any consistency in how things are communicated to project leaders. I believe this needs to be seriously overhauled with the following considerations at a minimum and some suggestions; all would need further discussion.
Project BenefitsThis is an area that I think is grossly misunderstood. There is a page on the main website that blows out a number of "benefits"; however that information isn't complete, nor does it provide any guidance on how people get access to these benefits. I know myself and others have had to resort to other methods, including paying for things out of our own pockets just because we couldn't figure out HOW to leverage the benefits of the .NET Foundation. This needs refinement, delegation, and process, but the key here is to make sure that project leaders know what we CAN get from the foundation and HOW we can get it. Maybe this needs to be a "members only" wiki or otherwise, but make it know what the "and more" or other elements of the marketing copy is. ContributingHow to contribute to the .NET Foundation is still a very magical thing. Just this evening, I went digging again to see what is necessary, and my head hurts. This process needs to be centralized as well, and consistent processes. Some groups require the creation of a Pull Request, others just an email; people will only go so far as to contribute. In ClosingI'm here, others are here, but we cannot force change at the top level; we need assistance. So I'm posting this plea publicly so all can see. I WANT TO SEE THE .NET FOUNDATION PROSPER; HOW CAN I HELP? Who's with me. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I first caught wind of the issue via Claire's twitter feed, I myself have left the overall .NET community by in large to their own thing over the last decade as felt like the culture and movement behind .NET was trending towards "better" compared to where we were all that time ago when we first attempted this OSS space. However, I was quite shocked to see all this unfold and to be blunt, the immaturity be on full display. There is a lot of barriers to entry to be part of the foundation and I could probably sit here and list several dot points long on where I can see the entire thing by design comes off as "intimidating". I myself tonight was thinking "hmmm, wonder if they are open to some advice on how to remove this friction as its clearly designed to be death by committee at the moment". My background is both a former .NET Product Manager, User Experience Advocate, Speaker, Evangelist for Microsoft and have over 20 years of programming - even I can't get a lock on what the value proposition here is and moreover who's running what and why. So, @mitchelsellers I'm open to helping with you now. How does one get started and if its filling out forms that have obscure workflow / process behind it then what exactly is being displayed here to others. We are all very smart person(s) in this space, who probably devote our careers to removing red tape for companies and communities. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@mossyblog Glad to see signs of support, I'm not 100% sure how we actually implement the change. I've tried, but haven't gotten in. I'm requesting access to the Project team as I think that team is one of the best "working groups" to try and start in, as that is where many of my items are noted. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I just saw it. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@BillWagner Its there now! Two tabs didn't submit quite quick enough! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
As one of the maintainers of a very large project, we have been through some very tough times as an open-source community, but we have come out stronger on the other side. This starts with solid leadership, the willingness to make tough decisions, respect for others, and cultivation of a persistent non-self-serving desire to roll up our sleeves and go to work. I am confident, with the help of all willing project maintainers, wrongs can be righted, and a better path forward can be laid. Let me/us know how we can be of help through it all. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'm sorry, but this is silly. All she is guilty of is being impatient and merging a PR without review. Unless she forced the Github Enterprise change through unilaterally then she should stay. If the proposal was accepted by the board then either nobody should resign or the whole board should go for agreeing. Just correct the mistake, learn from it, and move on. Scapegoating non-malicious parties isn't reassuring, it's politics. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
There are many both publicly and privately loud and clear asked for Claire's resignation. The board did not, but ultimately this was Claire's decision, she asked to resign and the board after multiple meetings and conversations chose to respect Claire's request and accept her resignation. We totally own this situation and it's our job to handle this as well as we possibly can. Asking for our resignation in my personal opinion isn't constructive nor helpful, of course we can and should be held accountable for our decisions. But can assure you it was a very tough decision to make, and politics wasn't the driving factor. We are committed to piece by piece regain your trust, if we don't it's in your full right to hold us accountable. Four out of seven board members are new and were officially onboarded this Monday, so an intense week to start with. I do thank you and everyone for making their voices heard, we are listening, will iterate of issues and questions, until we've clarified each concern. To be clear some findings might not be what people want to hear, but here we hope to have a dialog together on the ways to learn and adapt going forward. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I believe this situation would have granted ignoring the "loud and clear" voices that were asking for a resignation that, based on what is public, does not seem justified. If at each mistake made by a board member there must be a resignation because someone is loud and unhappy or pretends not to understand the terms of a contract that has been public for years, the situation becomes quickly unmanageable and unbearable. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
That is exactly the kind of thinking that lead to the outcry. Real conversation must end up on understanding. If there is an impossible trade off people will get it. Assuming one side knows better and others need to suck it up goes nowhere. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
She wasn't another board member but the top, right? It is the outcry against the foundation and not her. Her resignation properly recognizes she was the head, even if it wasn't her direct actions or ideas. This is how a clear message is sent to an organization and she joined that. That's stronger than her trying to change others from the inside. We'll see how it plays. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Its very clear this was more to do with optics / politics then substance. The pressure likely was something nobody wants to retain accountability over, is to be frankly honest the grievances displayed in all commentary were more filled with emotion and questioning the legitimacy of Microsoft intentions openly by way of the moral high ground of DNF. To be clear, I do think the problem hasn't even remotely found closure, all the resignation is doing is reducing an experienced members contribution and sending a clear signal to others with experience "be careful here of your personal brand and involvement, as there will be consequences..." - then once you overcome those hurdles, you have to now contend with the causation of the respondents issues at hand. It would appear that the charter behind their combinations with the DNF brand aren't clear. The messaging is somewhat messy, legal footing is both focused in around one particular sovereign and not also clear within that sovereignty. Membership and voting seems to be also more in around popularity contest less merit, which in itself can lead to further immaturity as well. I think the immediate concern up front is to address Microsoft as a brand and its sentiments towards open source, and that every contributor who has intersectional input here needs to be clear and sure they are open to it as being a custodian firstly. Secondly, the charters themselves need to provide clear and concise value proposition in around how each individual project is to benefit from the DNF and how the two way "transaction" here is measured. A blanket "one fits all" approach will not always be palatable to different project types and their individual members. It shouldn't have to either, the .NET Open Source community is a wide church of different approaches to the culture of OSS. Measurement is the key, there is a trade here and at the core of it, it would appear the trade and roles around how such transactions occur have substance. At present, all I can see from this particular issue is "we are still course correcting, and any mistake we make we will be dealt a swift and powerful smack" In psychology they call this - negative reinforcement with an emphasis on weakening behavior. It is not good health / report card so far, and will need a lot more than a resignation to rehabilitate behaviors on display here. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'm really sorry to hear that. I really felt like some people went too far while she sent an apology. I truly think that there's been a lot of digression about the things that she was accused of while it was not necessarily her own only responsibility. Where are we going with this new "cancel society"? People complains on discussions publicly nowadays while we used to keep things private when it was a matter of politics. Here, it went too far because this place has become a place to put pressure on the DNF organization and it's team. I find all of this quite disgraceful. Looking forward to seeing what will be the solution the DNF will come up with. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Shall we discuss this on the internal discussion board? Why is the internal discussion of DNF disabled? I understand transparency of DNF is important but it doesn't mean we should discuss DNF process/leadship on a public board. This is a topic for membership only, isn't it? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@IanKemp Sorry, I'm from a well-known censorship country. I have to admit that I'm somewhat brainwashed by the government and get used to the no-freedom press culture. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I have no issue with transparency. Though, what happened, in the end, is that we cancelled a person last week ... which is not a solution in the end. I think everyone would have been better putting some water in their wine and find a solution with her instead of using this place to put pressure on her and the DNF; while it should have been about finding a solution altogether. There is always good press and fake news ... and you should always try to have your own opinion; in the end, these are just reporting facts if they are doing their job correctly without taking sides. Don't quote me wrong here, I'm not against transparency and freedom of the press but sometimes you need to filter a lot of fake news to get to the truth. So, it's about finding the right balance simply. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
A person was not 'cancelled'. As ED she was responsible for everything that happened whether she had direct involvement or not. That's how the role works. She took responsibility and stepped down. This is not unheard of. Stop making it something that it isn't. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
My opinion is that the decisions are made as a team. And that nothing got solved about the issues between the DNF and the community from this. So, while she was responsible, everyone in the DNF was responsible too. How about we invest time in finding solutions from now? Thanks guys, have to work too. 😄 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@shawnwildermuth hello, may I ask why the internal discussions in DNF are disabled? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
and others
-
.NET Foundation and Community members,
We regret to inform you that yesterday, Claire Novotny, Executive Director of the .NET Foundation, sent the board of directors her letter of resignation. The board met this morning and decided that it was in the best interest of the .NET community, the .NET Foundation and Claire, to accept it.
This decision was not made lightly and we recognize and appreciate the work that Claire has done for the last 2 years to move the Foundation’s mission forward. The board has asked Claire to transition to an ex officio advisory position to the board as we search for our next Executive Director.
To be clear, this announcement isn't about solving the Foundation's issues with the community. We will communicate more information early next week. Stay tuned to this space.
Shawn Wildermuth
.NET Foundation Board Member
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions