Foundation's Board - crisis
Foundation's Board - crisis
Re: Foundation's Board - crisis
2012-10-20 17:39 UTC
think there was a fairly extended debate during "foundation by-laws" about
how such situation should be addressed. can't seem to find it now, but i
think the Council can nominate one of the follow up runners
--
View this message in context: http://maemo-community-mailing-lists.2589537.n2.nabble.com/Foundation-s-Board-crisis-tp7580532p7580533.html
Sent from the maemo-community mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
how such situation should be addressed. can't seem to find it now, but i
think the Council can nominate one of the follow up runners
--
View this message in context: http://maemo-community-mailing-lists.2589537.n2.nabble.com/Foundation-s-Board-crisis-tp7580532p7580533.html
Sent from the maemo-community mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Foundation's Board - crisis
2012-10-20 20:50 UTC
Unfortunately, none of propositions for handling such situation got incorporated into bylaws, and only proposition that Council have, is stretching the rules.
I think, that it's clearly unfair to do so, in case of *negative* Randall's example - when, just a while ago, we disagreed to bend rules for *positive* case of Mentalist Traceur willing to candidate for Board (he was late few hours with his candidacy).
If we (as per we = Community) declined his right to candidate, due to will for following rules strictly, we should so now. And that, sadly, via actual version of bylaws, mean another period of submitting candidates, and election.
Thanks Texrat, for withdrawing your candidacy just few hours, after 86 people voted for you, and voting got closed. It helped estabilishing foundation a *much*, really...
/Estel
On sob 20 paź 2012 19:39:19 CEST, misterc <claudebucher@gmail.com> wrote:
> think there was a fairly extended debate during "foundation by-laws"
> about how such situation should be addressed. can't seem to find it now,
> but i think the Council can nominate one of the follow up runners
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://maemo-community-mailing-lists.2589537.n2.nabble.com/Foundation-s-Board-crisis-tp7580532p7580533.html
> Sent from the maemo-community mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________ maemo-community mailing
> list maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
I think, that it's clearly unfair to do so, in case of *negative* Randall's example - when, just a while ago, we disagreed to bend rules for *positive* case of Mentalist Traceur willing to candidate for Board (he was late few hours with his candidacy).
If we (as per we = Community) declined his right to candidate, due to will for following rules strictly, we should so now. And that, sadly, via actual version of bylaws, mean another period of submitting candidates, and election.
Thanks Texrat, for withdrawing your candidacy just few hours, after 86 people voted for you, and voting got closed. It helped estabilishing foundation a *much*, really...
/Estel
On sob 20 paź 2012 19:39:19 CEST, misterc <claudebucher@gmail.com> wrote:
> think there was a fairly extended debate during "foundation by-laws"
> about how such situation should be addressed. can't seem to find it now,
> but i think the Council can nominate one of the follow up runners
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://maemo-community-mailing-lists.2589537.n2.nabble.com/Foundation-s-Board-crisis-tp7580532p7580533.html
> Sent from the maemo-community mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________ maemo-community mailing
> list maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
Re: Foundation's Board - crisis
2012-10-21 21:21 UTC
Relax, Estel. I've already explained myself and apologized to the community. Granted I should have done some relaxing myself before posting. But why you feel the need to prolong this on the mailing list I have no idea-- especially after you sang a different tune in the forum.
What I would REALLY like to see now, though, is for everyone who's been giving me crap to take a look at their own behavior. The continued arguing is what got me aggravated in the first place.
Randy
>________________________________
> From: "twilight312@gmail.com" <twilight312@gmail.com>
>To: List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
>Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 3:50 PM
>Subject: Re: Foundation's Board - crisis
>
>
>
>Unfortunately, none of propositions for handling such situation got incorporated into bylaws, and only proposition that Council have, is stretching the rules.
>
>I think, that it's clearly unfair to do so, in case of *negative* Randall's example - when, just a while ago, we disagreed to bend rules for *positive* case of Mentalist Traceur willing to candidate for Board (he was late few hours with his candidacy).
>
>If we (as per we = Community) declined his right to candidate, due to will for following rules strictly, we should so now. And that, sadly, via actual version of bylaws, mean another period of submitting candidates, and election.
>
>Thanks Texrat, for withdrawing your candidacy just few hours, after 86 people voted for you, and voting got closed. It helped estabilishing foundation a *much*, really...
>
>/Estel
>
>On sob 20 paź 2012 19:39:19 CEST, misterc <claudebucher@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> think there was a fairly extended debate during "foundation by-laws"
>> about how such situation should be addressed. can't seem to find it now,
>> but i think the Council can nominate one of the follow up runners
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://maemo-community-mailing-lists.2589537.n2.nabble.com/Foundation-s-Board-crisis-tp7580532p7580533.html
>> Sent from the maemo-community mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> _______________________________________________ maemo-community mailing
>> list maemo-community@maemo.org
>> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>
>
>
>
What I would REALLY like to see now, though, is for everyone who's been giving me crap to take a look at their own behavior. The continued arguing is what got me aggravated in the first place.
Randy
>________________________________
> From: "twilight312@gmail.com" <twilight312@gmail.com>
>To: List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
>Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 3:50 PM
>Subject: Re: Foundation's Board - crisis
>
>
>
>Unfortunately, none of propositions for handling such situation got incorporated into bylaws, and only proposition that Council have, is stretching the rules.
>
>I think, that it's clearly unfair to do so, in case of *negative* Randall's example - when, just a while ago, we disagreed to bend rules for *positive* case of Mentalist Traceur willing to candidate for Board (he was late few hours with his candidacy).
>
>If we (as per we = Community) declined his right to candidate, due to will for following rules strictly, we should so now. And that, sadly, via actual version of bylaws, mean another period of submitting candidates, and election.
>
>Thanks Texrat, for withdrawing your candidacy just few hours, after 86 people voted for you, and voting got closed. It helped estabilishing foundation a *much*, really...
>
>/Estel
>
>On sob 20 paź 2012 19:39:19 CEST, misterc <claudebucher@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> think there was a fairly extended debate during "foundation by-laws"
>> about how such situation should be addressed. can't seem to find it now,
>> but i think the Council can nominate one of the follow up runners
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://maemo-community-mailing-lists.2589537.n2.nabble.com/Foundation-s-Board-crisis-tp7580532p7580533.html
>> Sent from the maemo-community mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> _______________________________________________ maemo-community mailing
>> list maemo-community@maemo.org
>> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>
>
>
>
Re: Foundation's Board - crisis
2012-10-22 21:12 UTC
I haven't read the whole topic on the issue, but I vouch for Randall
as I know him in person.
Whatever he has done, I am sure he had his very good reason.
For what his worth, also, I don't like Estel way of commenting. Never
liked it before, continue to do so.
So Thanks Estel for doing a great job in making this community a very
welcoming one.
anidel
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 10:21 PM, Randall Arnold <texrat@ovi.com> wrote:
> Relax, Estel. I've already explained myself and apologized to the
> community. Granted I should have done some relaxing myself before posting.
> But why you feel the need to prolong this on the mailing list I have no
> idea-- especially after you sang a different tune in the forum.
>
> What I would REALLY like to see now, though, is for everyone who's been
> giving me crap to take a look at their own behavior. The continued arguing
> is what got me aggravated in the first place.
>
> Randy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "twilight312@gmail.com" <twilight312@gmail.com>
> To: List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
> Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 3:50 PM
> Subject: Re: Foundation's Board - crisis
>
> Unfortunately, none of propositions for handling such situation got
> incorporated into bylaws, and only proposition that Council have, is
> stretching the rules.
>
> I think, that it's clearly unfair to do so, in case of *negative* Randall's
> example - when, just a while ago, we disagreed to bend rules for *positive*
> case of Mentalist Traceur willing to candidate for Board (he was late few
> hours with his candidacy).
>
> If we (as per we = Community) declined his right to candidate, due to will
> for following rules strictly, we should so now. And that, sadly, via actual
> version of bylaws, mean another period of submitting candidates, and
> election.
>
> Thanks Texrat, for withdrawing your candidacy just few hours, after 86
> people voted for you, and voting got closed. It helped estabilishing
> foundation a *much*, really...
>
> /Estel
>
> On sob 20 paź 2012 19:39:19 CEST, misterc <claudebucher@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> think there was a fairly extended debate during "foundation by-laws"
>> about how such situation should be addressed. can't seem to find it now,
>> but i think the Council can nominate one of the follow up runners
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>>
>> http://maemo-community-mailing-lists.2589537.n2.nabble.com/Foundation-s-Board-crisis-tp7580532p7580533.html
>> Sent from the maemo-community mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> _______________________________________________ maemo-community mailing
>> list maemo-community@maemo.org
>> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>
>
>
>
>
>
as I know him in person.
Whatever he has done, I am sure he had his very good reason.
For what his worth, also, I don't like Estel way of commenting. Never
liked it before, continue to do so.
So Thanks Estel for doing a great job in making this community a very
welcoming one.
anidel
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 10:21 PM, Randall Arnold <texrat@ovi.com> wrote:
> Relax, Estel. I've already explained myself and apologized to the
> community. Granted I should have done some relaxing myself before posting.
> But why you feel the need to prolong this on the mailing list I have no
> idea-- especially after you sang a different tune in the forum.
>
> What I would REALLY like to see now, though, is for everyone who's been
> giving me crap to take a look at their own behavior. The continued arguing
> is what got me aggravated in the first place.
>
> Randy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "twilight312@gmail.com" <twilight312@gmail.com>
> To: List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
> Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 3:50 PM
> Subject: Re: Foundation's Board - crisis
>
> Unfortunately, none of propositions for handling such situation got
> incorporated into bylaws, and only proposition that Council have, is
> stretching the rules.
>
> I think, that it's clearly unfair to do so, in case of *negative* Randall's
> example - when, just a while ago, we disagreed to bend rules for *positive*
> case of Mentalist Traceur willing to candidate for Board (he was late few
> hours with his candidacy).
>
> If we (as per we = Community) declined his right to candidate, due to will
> for following rules strictly, we should so now. And that, sadly, via actual
> version of bylaws, mean another period of submitting candidates, and
> election.
>
> Thanks Texrat, for withdrawing your candidacy just few hours, after 86
> people voted for you, and voting got closed. It helped estabilishing
> foundation a *much*, really...
>
> /Estel
>
> On sob 20 paź 2012 19:39:19 CEST, misterc <claudebucher@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> think there was a fairly extended debate during "foundation by-laws"
>> about how such situation should be addressed. can't seem to find it now,
>> but i think the Council can nominate one of the follow up runners
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>>
>> http://maemo-community-mailing-lists.2589537.n2.nabble.com/Foundation-s-Board-crisis-tp7580532p7580533.html
>> Sent from the maemo-community mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> _______________________________________________ maemo-community mailing
>> list maemo-community@maemo.org
>> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>
>
>
>
>
>
http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p=1282399&postcount=120
...Radall stepped down from Board, just after end of election. It was kindly brought to our attention by lma, here:
http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p=1282803&postcount=9
...and outcome here:
http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p=1282882&postcount=12
---
Frankly, what this mean for Foundation, and how it will proceed from there, is unknown. Although, just before election, Mentalist Traceur candidacy for Board got declined (to be 100% in line with rules), so I see no reason why rules shouldn't be appended to Texrat, too.
/Estel