On 04/09/18 10:06, Bernhard E. Reiter wrote:
Hi,
Am Montag 03 September 2018 22:12:28 schrieb Stefan Uygur:
Pretty much it.... Can't say l disagree.
thanks for quoting the HTML email. Can you say to which you agree with in particular? Carsten's statement that we believes that everything is basically fine?
Bernhard, are you trying to change/misrepresent the intention of somebody else's email?
Funny question but how did a little posse in Berlin trying to a-- f--- the absent fellowship rep benefit free software?
Daniel had several potential ways to make sure his opinion and vote would have been represented. He had chosen to not pursue any of them. There also is a second fellowship representative. And the change voted upon there was already in planning before Daniel became to have a fellowship seat. He knows all this and could not convince others about his ways of working over several months and now does not accept what a majority has concluded and goes public here. It is yours do judge the discussion of course.
Now you are misrepresenting me
As I wrote[1] in February, I actually support the idea of replacing the fellowship elections with a better system.
The meeting in May voted on two motions though. The first motion abolished any future election for a representative.
The second motion included a very aggressive and ultimately toxic option to immediately end the last remaining fellowship representative's membership of the association. It was tucked away on the last page of a 9 page document where not all members noticed it. To put it bluntly, that motion is like somebody spitting in my face and then expecting me to respond politely. It implies that volunteers, like myself, are disposable and deserve little respect.
The president should have anticipated that it would be hard for people to work together in a friendly manner after such a vote and that is one of several reasons the call for his resignation is far from a trivial issue.
Regards,
Daniel
1. https://danielpocock.com/our-future-relationship-with-fsfe-2018