> Hi Keith,
>
> wrapping up:
>
> You have a definition of "community" (package maintainers on  
> SqueakSource) that is as controversial as the one you criticise.

> You have some very concrete ideas (visions) about Squeak, the way  
> the board and other entities should work.
>
> In my opinion, you even have a point or two.
>
> And in spite of all the above, you refuse to run for the board;  
> instead you insist on continuing to blame people from a safe  
> distance without showing the decency of being ready to take  
> responsibility.
>
> In one (final, as far as I'm concerned) word: pathetic.
>
> Sorry.
>
> Best,
>
> Michael :-(

Michael,

what purpose would running for the board do? And secondly you don't  
know what you are talking about.

Firstly, there have been no elections since this incident occurred, so  
your point is moot.

Secondly I would simply be accused of the same conflict of interest  
that I am accusing Andreas of. Release teams are supposed to work on  
the release not on the board.

Thirdly, the board is a political entity, it always has been, and it  
basically shouldn't do anything, it never has done anything in the  
past. I would only run for the board in order to stop the board form  
hassling people and causing trouble.

Fourthly, as a result of the actions of the board, and other things, I  
don't have time.

And Fifthly, you don't ask disabled people to climb stairs. In fact it  
is illegal, not to put processes in place that do not enable disabled  
people to fully participate in the work place etc. I am not planning  
to run for the board because I am not emotionally up to it.

Of course if you are the kind of person, that forces people with  
phobias to touch tarantulas, I would call you pathetic to have that  
kind of expectation.

Keith

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20100121/d942be87/attachment.htm