SPI Meeting Reminder: Thursday 14th June, 2012 @ 20:00 UTC

Ian Jackson ijackson at chiark.greenend.org.uk
Fri Jun 15 00:00:13 UTC 2012

Robert Brockway writes ("Re: SPI Meeting Reminder: Thursday 14th June, 2012 @ 20:00 UTC"):
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2012, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > In the email discussion no-one seems to have suggested that
> > "authoritative decisionmaker" _doesn't_ mean what I say it does.
> Actually I did, in my first response after you initially raised the
> concern.  I am quite prepared to concede that my interpretation of the
> term is wrong but it is different to yours (as I understand your
> position).

I'm afraid I've had a bit to drink now, but:

This is absolutely ridiculous.  Do yuo have no reading comprehension
whatsoever ?  What on earth do _you_ think "authortitative
decisionmaker" means ?  Do you have access to a dictionary ?

> > The counterarguments to my objection seem to have been "we have always
> > done it this way".  Well, I'm sorry I haven't always been paying 100%
> > attention to these things, but the fact that something has been done
> > wrong in the past is not a reason for doing it wrong now.
> I am cautious about changing wording without proper consideration (as per
> my next comment).

This is absolutely ridiculous.  _I wrote those words_ for another
project which was actually an autocracy and they have been taken out
of context.  Why do we need "proper consideration" to change wording
which is entirely wrong in this context, and replace it with something
sensible, but apparently we don't need "proper consideration" to pass
wrong wording.

> I disagree on this point.  My position is that we should definitely have
> counsel review any proposed resolution template before we put it in to
> action.  This need not be an onerous process.  SFLC has been very quick to
> respond to our queries in the past.  I am very impressed by the service
> they have been providing us.

This is absolutely ridiculous.  This "resolution template" was put
into action without legal review and now you are treating it as some
kind of immutable gospel and refusing to budge from it!

Apparently you have convinced a majority of the board.
This is absolutely ridiculous.  Don't they have any reading
comprehension either ???


More information about the Spi-general mailing list