[Board] Finalizing details: Board meeting this Sunday.

[Rob Landley]

On Sunday 13 August 2006 9:18 pm, Tracy Worcester wrote:
> On 8/11/06, Rob Landley <rob at landley.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday 10 August 2006 2:11 pm, Tracy Worcester wrote:
> > > Okay, based on the people I've spoken with so far, it looks like we can
> > > gather everyone but Rob on this Sunday at 1 p.m.  Rob, I'm truly sorry
> > we'll
> > > miss you, but hopefully we can get you in for the next one.
> >
> > If I was planning to do more than show up to hand in my resignation, I'd
> > probably put more effort into trying to get there.
> 
> 
> *nods*  Actually, I'm somewat confused as to timing.  Are you resigning
> immediately, or resigning once the bylaws are done?

Which do you prefer?

> I also really don't want to have to deal with Matt.  If you're wondering why
> > I
> > haven't answered his last message to me on the list, it's because John
> > told
> > me to stop posting (and he's right).  But I don't particularly want to
> > deal
> > with Matt in person anymore, either.
> 
> 
> I can understand that, and the only way we can avoid that is by closing the
> meetings.

It's actually possible that I'm confusing Matt with Brendan for some of this, 
and thus being too harsh on him.  (I can't keep track from this end of 
things, and have stopped trying.)

> Actually, there was discussion at the Board meeting about the nature of the
> list today.  We definitely want the list content to be open to the review of
> anyone.  But several people seemed to think they'd rather switch over to a
> format where anyone can read it, but only Board members can post to it.

*shrug*  I'm under the impression that initially the list was formed because 
the private emails we were cc-ing each other on weren't being archived 
properly.

Years 1 and 2 I was quite happy having the one big list where EVERYTHING was 
discussed publicly.  Of course that was before that Weinhall guy and the year 
3 fallout, but I really thought needing to talk privately to deal with 
specific issues would be just a temporary thing, not something to be 
institutionalized.

To be honest, I hate having to keep _track_ of what should be said in which 
context.  I generally only do that when somebody is paying me to keep quiet 
about something (generally some variant of NDA, which usually has a known 
expiration date).

But in this context, it hasn't been my place to impose my working style on 
other people.

> I mention this because it might have an impact on whether you'd be willing
> to stick around at least until the bylaws are finished.  If you truly need
> to be done, may I run the results of the bylaws committee past you, for my
> peace of mind?

Sure.  Since I'm not likely to _do_ much during this period of "staying" the 
difference seems largely academic to me, but I can hang around long enough to 
review bylaws and make 2/3 of the board quitting at the same time seem 
less...  sudden?

> ...Tracy

Rob
-- 
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.