To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldrawOpen lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / Organizations / LDraw / 2815
2814  |  2816
Subject: 
Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
Date: 
Wed, 4 Feb 2004 04:34:18 GMT
Viewed: 
3265 times
  
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
   In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Allister McLaren wrote:

   I understand that you want to be a member, and that many other agree, and indeed that it would probably bring no harm to Ldraw if you were, but is it necessary? It seems to me that this whole discussion is centred around the issue of whether or not you in particular will be precluded from the committee. Would it be so bad to not be a member, but still an active participant?

I don’t see this discussion as about Tim at all, except as a test case. As I’ve said before, he’s a handy metric. Any rule that excludes him (based on his current employment situation) is wrong, and worse, it is in my view bad for the organization.

I agree.

  
Jake put it pretty well, professional and technical organizations are rife with potential conflicts of interest if you look hard enough to find them. What matters are actual ones.

To ignore that and suggest that Tim is merely selfishly insisting on being able to stand for the StC and should stand aside in order to move things forward... is to, I feel, completely miss the point here.

I suggested nothing. I was merely asking a question. Can you just answer it without reading motives into it that don’t exist? Is it really necessary to be a member of the steering committee in order for suggestions on the direction of the organisation to be heard and judged fairly? I would hope not.

That said, Jake’s post made a lot of sense (it came through just after I wrote mine). It’s probably the most pragmatic approach presented thus far. For what it’s worth, I have no emotional investment in the final wording one way or the other. Like I said, I was just asking a question. I figured someone would take it the wrong way despite my best efforts at being diplomatic, I just didn’t think it’d be you Larry.

Cheers,

Allister



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
 
(...) Hi Allister - Thanks for that clarification. Actually, I was at a momentary loss for how to approach the answer, but now after thinking it through I have something to say. I would hope that whoever is elected to the Steering Committee would (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
  Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
 
(...) I do apologise if I misinterpreted your words, but I would suggest that my interpretation is an extremely reasonable one given the word choices you used. (...) I would think not, but I look to the steering committee to do a lot more than make (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
 
(...) I don't see this discussion as about Tim at all, except as a test case. As I've said before, he's a handy metric. Any rule that excludes him (based on his current employment situation) is wrong, and worse, it is in my view bad for the (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)

68 Messages in This Thread:





















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR