John Sonnenschein wrote:
> The OGB was spineless,
While we may be spineless, I think you and some other people
misunderstood what the OGB has done - all we agreed to was
passing on Sun's final statement to the community members.
How we respond on the community's behalf and what happens next
is still to be determined - we could issue a statement in
response, put the issue up for vote on the March ballot,
decide to accept it and move on, or take some other action
that someone comes up with. As the constitution requires,
the OGB made no binding decisions in private, and you now have
the opportunity to give us feedback to shape our response.
I hope the OGB members don't think I'm speaking out of turn,
but the OGB wasn't really negotiating with Sun - we asked for
an explanation, got Sun's first statement in December and
went through several rounds of getting clarifications and
updates to the statement. We provided feedback on our personal
opinions on the matter (and I see Rich & Steve have made public
their opinions of opposition to various parts of the statement),
as well as advice on what we thought community members would
ask and what we thought their reaction would be to various
things - but in the end the statement is Sun's position on the
matter, not an agreement between Sun & the OGB or the community.
As for the strength of our backbones, I believe the OGB now has
three strong non-Sun employed members who are free to take
whatever action they feel best. As a Sun employee, I am, as
previously noted, a little more limited, but I have not yet had
to abstain from any vote because I felt my opinion on the best
course for the community conflicted with my employer's best
interests.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
