all imho, and not directed at anyone in particular. not even morgan. :-) i am responding to what morgan said and regarding it as opinion held by n people, where i neither know nor care about the value nor composition of n. it doesn't even matter whether morgan (who posted it) is one of the n or not; i'm responding to the content, not the messenger(s).
Morgan Delagrange wrote: > > Let me turn that around. Certainly, j-c people have > relevant experience on the "Commons"-style approach. > At what point in this process could we offer advice on > how should it be organized, what is the scope, who > might be effective on the PMC? Our earliest > opportunity was after the Board had already approved > the charter. In fact, we did not even know of its > existence until that point. Not only does that > substantially diminish our sense of involvement and > empowerment this is rehashing old ground and the horse is dead. there was a failure of communication; members/pmcs failed to trickle the word down in all directions. the creation of the community@ list was partially in response to that, so it won't happen again. so can we *please* stop hearing about how people were left out of the loop? yes, everyone knows that; yes, everyone is sorry that it happened; no, it wasn't deliberate nor malicious; and yes, steps have been taken to hopefully lower the probability of it happening again. complaining about it now, particularly since corrective action has been taken, is imnsho a waste of time. let's get on with it. > it initially deprives the new project of > our experience. nonsense. j-c people are welcome -- nay, sought -- to participate in the a-c process. if you mean 'it deprived the j-c people of the chance to determine whether a-c should even exist or not', then yes, it did. but that's an invidious remark popping out because i'm very frustrated at all the whinging and destructive/obstructive comments. (no-one in particular in mind here, so don't take it personally.) let's move on. > Perhaps we could be further along and > more confident in our course if we had been allowed > more input at the start. that didn't happen, but you've been solicited to give input now. > Now, unavoidably, the newly included feel as if they've come > late to the party and are at a disadvantage wrt. their ideas > and opinions. then imho they're just feeling sorry for themselves and i have no patience with it. it has been stated too many times to count that a) the a-c commons project is being *defined*, and b) the opinions of j-c people are sought to help in that definition. so any 'disadvantage' is nothing of the kind. -- #ken P-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!"
