Dear all, On 27/11/2022 17:56, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Hi all,a vote was called under the pretense of consent, for a proposal that did not leave the assigned working group with an approval.
The vote has been called on a proposal which followed the agreed at LibOCon and in various email exchanges within the board and with our legal counsel.
That is in violation of good practice (to say the least), and it was perfectly ok for directors to leave it on the table (instead of working through 16 pages of text, without change history, to make an informed decision).
The chairman is still trying to use false information to justify his appalling behaviour.
The notes in the various version of the documents show that what Jan says and what our chairman uses to derail the process is false.
The chairman is also ignoring the deputy chairman confirmation that the process has been followed as agreed.
If the chairman is sure of what he states then he would have no issues in releasing the exchange of emails we had with our legal counsel where he never challenged the steps we should follow and that the sentence that Jan wanted to add was actually against laws and regulations.
Best, -- Thorsten
Ciao Paolo -- Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
