Here are my answers to the questions:

1. Approximately, how much time do you plan on spending on Squeak 
during the coming year (in any kind of unit)?

In the conventional sense of "on Squeak", probably around two hours a 
week, plus occasional chunks of solid do-what-it-takes time.  In this 
sense I shouldn't be competing for slots where there's a real need 
for time commitment.  i have no attachment to how this comes out.


  2. What are in your mind the three most important issues (not 
necessarily technical) we need to address in the coming year?

In many cases the purpose of an organization is survival of the 
organization.  To me the question before issues is what are we trying 
to save, and to create? When I step back from it all (and I have ;-) 
the most critical thing to save is the vitality of this community. 
And my sense of what has fed that is a subtle combination of 
mathematical cleverness, immersion in media (and other real effects) 
and joy of creativity.  We've always nourished a tool that is second 
to none in productivity, and we've always been fed in return by all 
the fun things that are possible.  The question was specific, so...

	What excites the most active members of this community

	What opportunities exist in today's world to leverage our 
current strengths

	How can we best feed that energy back into our community and 
out into the world


  3. What is your view on fund raising and how any such collected 
money should be dealt with?

Sadly, this is not my strength.  I am bad with money.  My strength is 
a certain grounded cleverness that produces things of value. 
Fortunately, this has caused enough money to fall from the sky to 
keep me going.  My approach to fund raising for Squeak would be 
pretty much the same perspective.  I can lend a name that is known, 
but if you want a good fund-raiser, you need someone else in addition.


  4. What is your view on the ongoing process of making 
SqueakFoundation  a not-for-profit legal entity?

If we're going to have an organization, then this is the right 
approach.  Again, sadly, it's not my strength, but I certainly 
support this effort.


  5. Do you think the Team model is appropriate for organizing our 
efforts or should we come up with something else?

We always had a team when I was involved. But it wasn't because 
having a team was the goal.  We had a mission that was, by the way, 
not Squeak.  It was to bring the joy of mathematics and media to life 
(for kids (of all ages)). We had the good fortune that Alan 
campaigned for this mission, and that we assembled a crew that could 
pull it off with very little resources (on the scale of Microsoft and 
Google).

To come back to the question, though, it feel split when I read it: 
There's organizing, and there's doing. I'd like to figure out some 
way to leverage the stakeholders (to anticipate #6).  It would be 
nice to work more closely with them, feed their energy back into the 
community, maybe organize some of the community around supporting 
them in various ways.  They are already Squeak teams, and they're 
doing some great work.


  6. Do you have any specific views on how the Squeak board and the 
Squeak community should work together with the Squeak satellite 
communities (Croquet, Seaside, Sophie, Squeakland, Scratch etc), also 
referred to as "stakeholder communities"?

I think these stakeholders are the key to Squeak's future -- more 
than Squeak itself.  These are where "the rubber meets the road" -- 
ie where Squeak's power and leverage create effects and artifacts in 
the world, that bring attention, people, ideas and resources back 
into the community.  Step one would be to ask them how we could most 
effectively give energy to them and bring it back to the community at 
large.


  7. The squeak.org release is our most important asset. How do you 
see it evolving over the next few years?

I disagree that this is our most important asset.  Our most important 
asset is our cleverness and our joy in this pursuit that has kept us 
together through years of little pay and little acceptance in the 
world.

The Squeak release is a great asset, it's true, and it's certainly 
worth some strategizing on how to make the most of it and take it 
forward into the future.  This is an area I'd like to which I would 
enjoy contributing.  So you can know, my intuition of the important 
challenges and opportunities in, say, the next 10 years are

	Web relevance - Ease of deployment, ability to interoperate

	Security with simplicity - As Mark says, it's just extreme modularity

	Multicore opportunity - Simple solutions can be fast


  8. Do you have any thoughts on the current relicensing effort?

It was always the model we worked with, and it's only an accident 
that everything isn't free and clear.  It would be a huge release of 
energy to complete this, so I am willing to work at it, even though, 
again, this is not my strength (except maybe as a "persuader").


  9. How would you like Squeak to be positioned in the open source 
world in year 2012?

I'm not sure how to answer this. I'd like it to be viewed as (and to 
actually be) totally free.  I'd also like it to be one of the most 
vibrant communities in the computer world.  To do this, though, 
Squeak will need to change, but I don't think the Squeak spirit needs 
to change a lot.


  10. What do you see as the overall role of the board?

In the early days of Squeak we had no board.  Squeak Central operated 
out of its own convictions, and this delightful community formed 
around that activity.  The need for a board arose when that situation 
changed, and I'd be inclined to reflect on that earlier chemistry and 
interplay to understand the best role for the board.  To me this goes 
back to my comments on #6.

I tried not to look at any of the other statements, but I did see a 
response to something Yoshiki said.  And I'm on his side.  It could 
be that the most important role of the board in the next few years is 
to guide us as a community through significant changes in our 
language and our image (in both senses of the word ;-).


  11. What actions would you take to promote Squeak as an environment 
for professional software development?"

It's hard to promote a professional software development that's 
different from everything else.  To me some of the keys are to offer 
things that no one else can offer, to be light on our feet to use our 
metacircular leverage to adapt to new situations,  to morph into 
something else, to look like something else, etc.  Look back at 
number 6.  That is where the action is, and it is what will feed life 
back into Squeak and this community.  I didn't answer the question, 
did I?

;-)
	- Dan