Yes, I know. There have been a few brought up over these past months, but we condoned them all. We even have a pinned thread for those in relation to Secretaries. I'd rather not get into it again. Our membership has made it clear that conflicts of interest are acceptable.
Regards, Adam Culp On Monday, November 7, 2016 at 9:29:17 AM UTC-5, Larry Garfield wrote: > > Adam, I'm curious. What other conflict of interest issues are you > referring to? You make it sound like we're drowning in conflict of > interest problems, but I don't see that at all. > > --Larry Garfield > > On 11/06/2016 11:42 AM, Adam Culp wrote: > > Thus the spiral of more and more conflict of interests continues, > condoned. > > I will discontinue because others appear not to care, or do not see the > problem. I have better things to do than tilting windmills. Moving on. > > Regards, > Adam Culp > > > On Sunday, November 6, 2016 at 12:25:36 PM UTC-5, Magnus Nordlander wrote: >> >> Adam, >> >> According to the bylaws, there is no provision allowing for >> non-recognition of a nomination based on conflict of interest (or any other >> basis). The only option in cases like this (save for the rescinding >> nominations/acceptances, and barring a bylaw change) would be to recognize >> the nomination, and then campaign against the election of the person in >> question. I believe this is what has been referred to in this thread as >> letting the voters decide. >> >> Magnus >> >> On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 4:33 AM, Adam Culp <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I'm sorry, but I do not feel this nomination should be recognized. Not >>> because Graham is not capable, because he is very capable. But rather >>> because of the personal relationship between Graham and Samantha, a current >>> Secretary. See further comment at >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/php-fig/jFNMb6ykn1k/yLec0XvFCAAJ >>> >>> I think Graham can contribute a great deal, but should do so as an >>> outside contributor rather than in a leadership role due to this conflict >>> of interests. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Adam Culp >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, November 3, 2016 at 8:21:37 PM UTC-4, Matthew Weier >>> O'Phinney wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> I hereby nominate Graham Daniels for a position on the Core Committee. >>>> >>>> Graham has excellent development skills, as evidenced by his activity >>>> in the >>>> League of Extraordinary Packages, as well as his work at refinery29. He >>>> speaks >>>> often at conferences on development topics, but, also, and arguably more >>>> importantly, the human aspects of development. Related, he is the >>>> original >>>> author of The Code Manifesto, a set of value propositions for safe, >>>> equal, and >>>> effective collaboration as developers. >>>> >>>> I think these skills make him an excellent candidate for FIG. >>>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP Framework Interoperability Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/4a69a783-a70f-44e4-a367-ec7c0c7f5a6b%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
