Lex Spoon wrote:

>This coup is illegitimate.  I hope that the Squeak community does not
>fall for this power grab, and that they remember this incident well. 
>This power is neither legitimate nor a good idea.
>
>If there is a Squeak reorganization, we should hear about it from Squeak
>Central itself.  That has not happened.
>
>This comment about Squeak Foundation supporting them is flatly wrong. 
>The new Squeak Foundation does not even exist yet--there is only a
>mailing list discussing the formation of such a thing.  The only way
>such a fledgeling proto-organization could support such a group, is
>through unanimous agreement of the members.  Not only is such agreement
>lacking, but the idea was never circulated at all.  It wasn't even
>discussed in general, much less was a specific list of names sent
>around.
>
>The proposed "in" list is not representative.  Where are the educators
>and education researchers?  They are Squeak's raison d'etre.  And where
>are the people representing *my* views on how Squeak should move
>forward?  Am I supposed to send supplications to a private mailing list?
> Get real.  I have been hoping for a new Squeak organization to support
>*more* Squeakers than merely squeak-dev.  This effort moves in the wrong
>direction, and represents only a subset of squeak-dev, which is itself a
>small subset of the Squeak community.
>
>
>Overall, of the three tiers of support that a true leadership structure
>of Squeak should have--Squeak Central, Squeak Foundation, and the
>general community--this group has none.  It has no legitimacy except
>outside its own claims.  They can say they are our commanders all they
>like, but it will never make it so.
>
>
>And what is the point of this power grab, anyway?  There is no crisis! 
>The community has done well over the years by two approaches: put up
>services that people can voluntarily use, and--when we have to agree on
>something--discuss it on the mailing list until a rough concensus is
>reached.  For examples of the first, witness the swiki, SqueakMap, BFAV,
>SqueakPeople, and SqueakSource.  For examples of the second, consider
>the harvesting process.  What excuse is there for someone in the group
>to start bossing the rest of us around?  We don't need a tyrant,
>temporary or otherwise.
>
>The only plausible reason I can think of for this power grab -- and it's
>regrettably ugly -- is that this is an attempt to sidestep annoying
>people on squeak-dev who disagree with people on the designated list. 
>Is this truly a good idea?  I actually think it is a good idea that, at
>the few times we do need to agree on something as a community, that we
>take our time and work on wide agreement.
>
>
>Community members, if any of you go along with this, the result will be
>massive fragmentation of what community we have left.  Already, external
>groups have left the squeak-dev-led Squeak because they do not feel
>represented.  Now we are seeing an effort to divide squeak-dev into
>factions: those who follow the designated list, and those who (like me)
>reject it.  If a large portion of the community does follow them, then
>an even larger portion will fork off and make NetSqueak... then
>FreeSqueak... then OpenSqueak....
>
>We would end up like the Scheme community, with 100 different fiefdoms
>all mildly incompatible, and all pathetically re-inventing the same
>basic infrastructure.  That's a major waste of effort.  Let's work
>together, and let's do what we think is right -- not what a self-styled
>"leader" says we should do.  It is not too late for us to be a loosely
>coupled comunity using a shared codebase.  We have already lost too many
>people who have decided to fork at old versions of Squeak instead of
>dealing with the current crowd.  Let's try and get some of those people
>to come back, instead of forking even further.
>
>
>Gentlemen on the "in" list:  Instead of spending those 6-7 days
>discussing how best to make a power grab, I wish you had spent that time
>working on a concrete proposal for a proper democratic organization.  I
>have seen zero effort from you on that front.  Not one post to the
>formation mailing list has proposed concrete details of an organization.
>100% of your visible effort has been to attain personal power over the
>Squeak community.  Please stop.  Put your energy into working out a
>truly good community, instead of in this destructive direction.
>
>Consider carefully that you are not going to take over "Squeak" even if
>you try.  Even if it is called Squeak, you will have but a subset of the
>population that you see now.  You will be kings of a small fiefdom, and
>you will be reviled by all those who leave.  You could instead be a
>mid-level leader of a thriving community, loved by those you are
>helping.
>
>Is there some issue that is frustrating you guys?  What is it that you
>would like to see happening, exactly?  What do you think will not
>happen, unless you someone gain the power to command us?
>
>Everyone:  Let us keep moving forward as I proposed before.  Let us
>thoroughly packagize Squeak, so that there are fewer central decisions
>that have to be made at all. The more we can packagize, the more becomes
>optional, and the more people can share efforts with the main group
>instead of needing to fork off separately.  This seems to be going along
>well, as far as I can see.
>
>And let's proceed to *carefully* build a proper democratic organization,
>for those few times that we must make group agreements.  I expect these
>times to be few, because most action in Squeak happens in individual
>sub-projects which will have their own structure.  For those few times
>that we do need to make a decision, we should do it gently and
>carefully.  Let's take our time and build a proper organization that
>includes everyone.
>
>
>
>Quite sincerely,
>
>Lex Spoon
>
I assumed that Goran's message was blessed by the 'Squeak Powers'. As an 
"outsider" (so to speak), I now don't know what to think. I would have 
assumed that Goran/squeaders would have clear understanding of the 
backlash that would befall him/them.
(Russell suggests taking a poll to determine community support regarding 
Goran's message. But, frankly, I don't know what I'd be voting on.)

confused,

brad

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20050215/fcb10cde/attachment.htm