incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <>
Subject Re: PMC chair vs. reorg proposals
Date Sun, 05 Feb 2012 20:37:51 GMT
+1, simply more obstructionist rhetoric from Bill.  Let's vote, if the board wants something
different we can vote again.

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 5, 2012, at 3:24 PM, Christian Grobmeier <> wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 9:04 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. <> wrote:
>> On 2/5/2012 1:40 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>> Just to set the record straight and get out of the way, *my* position
>>> is that I do not feel particularly qualified to lead the charge in
>>> presiding over the disassembly of the incubator. My alternative
>>> proposal is not my 'election platform' -- it's just an alternative --
>>> and as much Ralph's now as mine. If the incubator isn't disassembled,
>>> it has to find some compromise between (to oversimplify) you and Joe,
>>> and it's one possibility.
>> Which was entirely my point.  You don't have 'platforms'.  You each
>> 'champion' entirely different approaches to solving the issues that
>> everyone agrees do exist, today.
>> So without knowing which direction we travel, it is hard to select
>> the most appropriate candidate.  Or rather, selecting one of the two
>> candidates pretty much sets forward a direction.  So as the chief
>> advocates of two competing proposals, it's no longer possible to
>> discern the candidate from the proposal.
>> Or rather, if either of you were elected to guide in a direction you
>> very much disagreed with, you would be very frustrated, and probably
>> end up as a disappointing leader of any efforts at all.
>> I'd rather have an election in 2 or 3 months after IPMC or the board
>> decides what will happen next.  And depending on how the two of your
>> positions and ideas shift over that time in these discussions, it's
>> entirely possible you each make equivalently successful leaders over
>> the final consensus that is drawn up.  For Noel to serve and just let
>> the current discussion play out sounds great to me.
> I simply can't believe it.
> We have discussed to reelect chair position. Deeply.
> We have discussed chair rotation. Deeply
> We have nominated candidates- three good catches. They provided us
> long statements on their visions. We know, without the community these
> visions will not work.
> And now we do not do anything because the visions are not ready to
> go??? Wasn't it mentioned that the chair is an administrative role??
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message