At 02:06 PM 2/8/99 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 08:38:29AM -0500, Ken Stubbs wrote:
>> i have said repeatedly that kent crispin is not a member of CORE, not an
>> employee of any member of CORE, receives no compensation from CORE nor is
>> he the official spokesman for CORE.
>
>Not only has Ken said this more than once, I have said it as well.
>Just so everyone is clear on this matter: I do not speak for CORE.
Maybe I missed something. Whoever said you did?
>As far as whether I personally would support the Paris Draft:
[snip}
>For these, and probably other reasons that I don't have time to
>think about right now, I see no value in supporting the Paris
>document.
The problem is that you are still seeing "you vs them". What about "us"
working through two different ideas and then working hard to merge the best
parts of both together? There are some things that are different from the
BMW draft and they have enough merit to garner some impressive support,
over the BMW draft. This indicates a serious consensus split. Instead of
trying to disenfranchise a whole class of folks, who have some serious
disagreement with you, why not work to a negotiated solution?
You are playing, what Stef likes to call, the "Zero Sum" game. It really
isn't appropriate. Rejecting the Paris draft, out of hand, is rejecting an
entire segment of the Internet community that doesn't agree with you. To
afterwards call that a consensus is not only absurd, but smacks of
Orwellian double-speak. How can you have a consensus when an entire
community segment disagrees and is not included in your "consensus"
document?? It would certainly be questioned as to how you'd have the
arrogance to claim it.
What you, Amadeu, and company seem to fail to understand is that you have
some serious, consensus breaking, disagreement and it is focused on the
Paris Draft. You actually have much less support than you had after
Barcelona (where even I, though skeptical, was willing to "wait and see").
You've befriended the trademark community at the expense of your original
supporters. Some would call that a sell-out, I don't. I see it as you
getting stuck in the middle and not being willing to admit it, or know what
to do about it. It is a more generous view.
The only way out is a gap analysis and some creative negotiating towards a
solutions matrix. It appears that, with the possible exception of the
trademark interests, the rest of the community is willing to go down that
road, are you? Most of the significant leaders have spoken in favour of
this approach, will you lead, follow, or get out of the way?
___________________________________________________
Roeland M.J. Meyer -
e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet phone: hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com
Personal web pages: http://staff.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
Company web-site: http://www.mhsc.com
___________________________________________________
KISS ... gotta love it!
