Jimmy, (apologies for cross posting for anyone who is double-subscribed, but a lot of members are not)
First, I don't think we should vote on this in Feburary. We've already passed the deadline for agenda items, and I can't see this in any way as "urgent". Also, you're violating our new procedures which require resolutions to be posted to spi-private, NOT spi-general. For this reason, I've gone ahead and cross-posted it. Second, I'm unclear on the roles of spi-general vs. spi-private here. I'm particularly concerned that many contributing members have unsubscribed from spi-general because of prior spam issues. Also, quite frankly, I'm unclear on why we even *have* an spi-general, given that the subscribers seem to be a subset of spi-private. I think the purposes of the various lists from the organization's perspective needs to be clarified before passing any such resolution. Finally, I'm not going to vote for this resolution unless I first see that several to many contributing members think one is warranted. I personally don't see a resolution as necessary; several members have made clear after the opensource.org discussion that they expect greater transparency and the board has responded through improved rules on notifications for board business as well as plans to disclose the board@ discussion on that topic. At this point, MJ is grandstanding and I won't cater to it. -- Josh Berkus Treasurer Software in the Public Interest, Inc. www.spi-inc.org _______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
