> 1) Do you support stepping up fundraising?
Absolutely.

> If so what do you propose to do
> with the money collected?

After we pay the current bills, bounties and funding students to work  
on core facilities come to mind.

> 2) Do you support bounty projects?  If so can you lay out how you  
> would like
> to see a bounty program administered?

See above. I can think of a couple different models that might work  
including bidding, claiming for a time period, X-prize style where  
you offer a prize to complete a goal and first one to hit it claims  
the money.  I think it would require some discussion to come up with  
the appropriate model and not every model may be appropriate for  
every project.

> 3) Do you support incorporation and not for profit tax status for  
> Squeak
> Foundation?

Yes

> 4) What do you believe is the future of Smalltalk?

I believe every other language is asymptotically approaching Smalltalk.

> 5) What do you think the community is doing right, what should be  
> improved?

The web site is looking great, some of the teams are doing great  
things.  Letting Ralph focus on raising the quality bar for 3.10 is a  
step in the right direction.  I think there are rather too many  
competing forks coming up and some coordination/communication might  
be in order.  I don't think the board can dictate any of this, but I  
think it can help people make connections.

> 6) Should the Squeak be represented at more conferences?

Yes - too many people have never heard of it.

> 7) Should Tim be given a gazillon dollars for his excellent work on  
> Squeak?

Sure, it should be easy since he lives in Canada and their dollars  
are so much smaller than real dollars.
:-)  Seriously, it would be great to find ways to reward more people  
for their contributions.

> They are not arbitrary questions or one sided Ron's agenda  
> questions.  I
> thought they were pretty well sanitized and general.  Some of them are
> downright softballs!
>
> Ron
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tim Rowledge [mailto:tim at rowledge.org]
>> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 1:58 PM
>> To: Ron at USMedRec.com; The general-purpose Squeak developers list
>> Subject: Re: election details *PLEASE READ*
>>
>>
>> On 19-Feb-07, at 10:32 AM, Ron Teitelbaum wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Craig suggests that we do not post an article that has candidates
>>> answer my
>>> questions because my questions are loaded.
>>
>> I pretty much agree with Craig here; no bad intent is needed by
>> anyone in the process and yet it can very easily become a nasty
>> argument.  It seems to be the nature of email/group communications.
>> Survey questions (and what Ron was suggesting is essentially a
>> survey) are very difficult to write in such a way as to *elicit
>> opinions* rather than *agreement with implied opinion in the  
>> question*.
>>
>> 1) Have you stopped beating your spouse yet?
>> 2) Do you agree that we must always fight against stopping <foo>
>> being prevented, if indeed it not happening caused nothing to not be
>> undoably redone?
>> 3) Why? Explain in 750 words, double spaced on unlined paper. In
>> green crayon.
>>
>>
>> tim
>> --
>> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
>> Klingon Code Warrior:- 7) "You question the worthiness of my Code?! I
>> should kill you where you stand!"
>>
>>
>
>
>