Sorry if my last email was confusing. Let me restate:
That an issue has come up should be public. The results of resolving
should be public.
Resolving problems often should be private.
Examples of discussions that should be private:
+ Executive Director candidates and their status while recruiting and
negotiating with them. Often people are employed somewhere else, so
public disclosure is inappropriate.
+ Recruitment of new corporate board members. Companies will usually
want to (or for compliance, may have to) control disclosure of joining
the OpenID Foundation. It may be part of a larger strategy that they
want to control the disclosure of.
Examples of public:
+ OIDF is looking for a new ED, a new ED has been hired
+ OIDF is recruiting additional corp board members, a new corp. board
member has joined (but not to be disclosed until they are ok with it)
-- Dick
On 2-Dec-08, at 12:25 PM, Chris Messina wrote:
This sounds contradicting -- Dick, are you saying that this
discussion should be made public so the community it aware of it, or
made private because "It is often inappropriate and counter
productive in negotiations for your strategy and discussions to be
public."
Which side are you advocating for?
Frankly I think the private list should be used as a last resort, if
not banished altogether.
I'm fed up with private back-door conversations with the "open" ID
foundation.
Chris
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Dick Hardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Agree the community should be aware of issues and results.
It is often inappropriate and counter productive in negotiations for
your strategy and discussions to be public.
-- Dick
On 2-Dec-08, at 11:27 AM, Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) wrote:
Open is King! Why hide such an important subject? It's certainly
something the community and others should know about and to which
results we'd come eventually!
Regards
Signer: Eddy Nigg, StartCom Ltd.
Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: Join the Revolution!
Phone: +1.213.341.0390
On 12/02/2008 07:27 PM, DeWitt Clinton:
Definitely sounds like a problem. We should discuss legal matters
off the public list, however.
Off topic, do Marketwatch URL's really contain unencoded '{' and
'}' characters? Someone should really point them to RFCs 1738 and
2396.
-DeWitt
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Johannes Ernst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/OpenQ-Announces-Release-Breakthrough-Solutions/story.aspx?guid=
{3E32B03F-4DDD-4AC3-83F2-D02A46D39176}
Johannes Ernst
NetMesh Inc.
http://netmesh.info/jernst
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
--
Chris Messina
Citizen-Participant &
Open Technology Advocate-at-Large
factoryjoe.com # diso-project.org
citizenagency.com # vidoop.com
This email is: [ ] bloggable [X] ask first [ ] private
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
