----- Original Message -----
From: "william(at)elan.net" <william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: [spf-discuss] Re: List of nominations for people to sit on
the "SPF Leadership Council"
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004, jpinkerton wrote:
William - please either accept unconditionally or decline your
nomination.
At the moment I have you down as accepting unconditionally - but now I
am
asking you to confirm that on this list.
I posted my email to you that clearly explains my position and it does
include word "unconditionally". And as others already saw I'm quite
willing to work in this council, I just expect it to finish the
organization
charter as part of its work process and if council does not want to do it
and SPF organization continues without it, I'll not have interest to be on
that council.
Excellent - your on the list of candidates then. Thank you for the
clarification :-)
And please stop trying to hijack a process to your own ends. Those of
the
SPF community who have been on IRC over the last day or two know very
well
what I am doing, and I am grateful for their input.
There are those of us who don't participate in IRC and you seem to be
declining their input. So again the problem is that you're limiting
something to only a subset of the community.
Not at all - I just don't want to have to type out my explanations too many
times in amongst the work to a deadline. I am sorry that not everyone is on
IRC - I am not on it myself all the time, but it is a most useful medium for
finding out what other people's agendas are, and to be able to ask for quick
help, advice, etc. That sort of chat just isn't possible on an already
noisy list. It's getting to the point where I don't read the list in detail
anymore.
I just don't have the time to get into a protracted discussion on the
list 10 hours before voting starts. Yes it'll be a webform with all the
scripts and all the opportunity for voters to double check their votes
and all stuff. I am not going to sit here and write a lengthy post
about the details when I should be writing the scripts. You either
trust me to do this reasonably well or you don't - which is it?
I trust you to do the process I just don't trust you to make rules about
it
(and in fact I think you have good intentions with every one of those
rules
it is just that they are rules that you made on your own when in fact
those
should be done by consensus of the community).
What you are missing maybe is the fact that this whole process came about
because the spf community were incapable of reaching consensus on anything.
What you call my "rules" are actually only guidelines - it gives everyone a
basis for discussion and decision. That is what the spf community has been
without for too long.
Please understand - I have done this *many* times before, and you are
not
going to say anything about the process that I'm not already aware of so
relax - I'll take my flaming if I'm wrong.
I'm happy to know you have experience with the process. As for flaming we
need to minimize possibility of that happening and make process open and
transpaerent - that is in your best interest!
I don't care about me, I'm flameproof - but I believe that the spf
community wants to move forward.
Right now it's more important that the people show their wishes by
voting.
Oh - and btw - you haven't seen my acceptance - have you? No - because
I am
not standing, and never had any intention of doing so, because I *know*
there is a conflict between standing and acting as returning officer.
That is great that you understand about this conflict, you should have
said from the start that you can not accept being nominated because
you're running the elections.
Well - William - during your attempts to force your ideas onto this process
you have never asked me, and you have never said that you would not stand if
you were the returning officer.
So let's leave the wrangling - do the vote, and work with the result. It'll
be better than what we have atm, won't it?
/me goes back to scripting.
Slainte,
JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492