On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Jim Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been warned away from the Hawaiian Studies group(s) at UH.
Actually this does not much surprise me and it would not surprise me much if it turned out that teaming with them ended up being counter-productive or impossible. But it seems to me that HOSEF lacks access to grants and skills in Hawaiian language that the kuokoa project would really benefit from and I think that is why it has stagnated and why it will continue to stagnate. Maybe there are scholars at BYU or HPU or wherever that we could recruit, or maybe someone else has a vision for making the project go without a grant or a credentialed expert, which I think would be great. I don't see how this connects to the current controversy (ewaste or no ewaste), but maybe it does not and was not intended to. It might help me be less confused if I knew what the board has actually done and what Jim would like to see the board do in the future. At the beginning of the controversy, I thought that the board had actually sacked Scott and called a halt to anything to do with e-waste. Jim seems to be saying that very little has actually been done. It would really help me to know what changes are being proposed. I am getting the impression that Jim would like most activities to continue, but with new shiny hardware donated by someone who is willing to pay for new shiny hardware, not old scruffy hardware donated by people who mostly want to be rid of it. And Jim thinks Scott needs to be more conscientious about getting clearance from the board before taking certain actions. I have the impression that Scott was deeply offended by some of the emails, but I am not clear whether he wants to quit, to fork, to fight for the status quo, or make some sort of compromise where ewaste is less of a priority or done away with and he is more careful with respect to board approval. I have been trying to at least appear neutral and give Jim a fair chance, but I think I need to say that I know and trust Scott and I admire the work he has done for HOSEF, so the way in which Jim's accusations against Scott appeared and the ideas for changing HOSEF all struck me as very negative and surprising. It seems possible to me that Scott has stepped over some boundaries and needs censure or discipline, it even seems possible (though unlikely) that it would be better for HOSEF that he step down as ED. But the way that these things have been handled has made me confused and upset, and it has also seemed possible that the whole thing is some personal vendetta or power sturggle between Scott and Jim. I don't know, I am not accusing anyone of anything except this, that neither the board nor Scott made it clear what was going on, what was at stake, and in Jim's case, what HOSEF would look like if he got his way. I have two old Sun servers that I was going to donate to HOSEF. Does HOSEF still want them? Dave _______________________________________________ LUAU@lists.hosef.org mailing list http://lists.hosef.org/listinfo.cgi/luau-hosef.org