Is it standard procedure for credentials of Foundation members to be
discussed on-list like this -- particularly for existing members in good
standing?
For example, I don't recall my own membership being discussed herein when I
was renewed; it was done in private email with the Membership
Yes. This seems to have gone beyond the realm of reasonableness and into a
personal attack on another Foundation member. Please don't do this.
I am only on this list due to the benefit of sitting on top of Google's
pile of money, some of which we contribute to Gnome. I am too busy with my
own
For what is worth, I don't support the idea of getting Richard out of
the GNOME Foundation, nor the way that this idea is being discussed
and nor the suggestion of moderating his posts by default.
I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your
right to say it
- François-Marie
Bradley,
No, this is not standard procedure. This should have been a private matter
and not something that should have been brought out in public. Regardless
of who it is, this should have been communicated privately with the list
owner. Stormy has done something similar in keeping things in
Hi,
Le jeudi 10 janvier 2013, à 12:36 -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn a écrit :
Is it standard procedure for credentials of Foundation members to be
discussed on-list like this -- particularly for existing members in good
standing?
For example, I don't recall my own membership being discussed herein
On Thu, 2013-01-10 at 12:36 -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
Is it standard procedure for credentials of Foundation members to be
discussed on-list like this -- particularly for existing members in good
standing?
My question was a rhetorical one.
___
