Last word again (WAS: Re: [SM-Discuss] hungry for cake)
hgreig at bigpond.net.au
Thu Aug 19 23:45:03 EDT 2004
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:37, Seth Alan Woolley wrote:
> Please reply off-list and remember that his method is to respond to
> every email sent, getting the last word. Thus, if we don't reply to the
> list, we see fewer responses from Hamish. Q.E.D.
> P.S. Hamish, I've got brownies over here. If you would just come and
> get them, I'll pay for all of Eric's mistakes.
Seth, If you think the cake is important then maybe I finally understand why
you don't understand my position and continue to try to rationalise the
I am only repeating, in every way I can, the same points and facts.
I joined an open volunteer organisation with the intention of helping to make
the best distribution possible, I attempted to discuss and solve problems, I
made every effort to communicate my thoughts and intentions to every other
developer, I investigated alternate points of view and attempted to
compromise with everyone else's point of view. You might not like my style of
communication but you can't disagree with me.
It turns out that the leader of the volunteer organisation didn't respect
other peoples ideas and feedback, didn't know how to organise, wouldn't allow
discussion of roadmaps, made many ill-informed, irrevocable, unilateral
decisions, didn't practise what he preached with regards openness and
accountability, didn't represent the developers in the project, made a
monumentally poor decision not to follow the developers efforts and status
and when called to task over the whole affair, pleaded the fifth.
Volunteering to do a job no-one else wanted automatically grants some thanks
and allowances, but the result overrides that automatically granted respect
and so with no comment made, with no changes to actions or attitudes we can
only understand him to mean he has done nothing wrong and would repeat all
those mistakes again if given the chance. To me that means no credit for
volunteering in the first place can put that account back into the black.
You once likened him to Kenneth Lay and if money had been involved, there
would be little difference between the two, but because we were all
volunteers, it was only our efforts and our principles that were abused.
Whether it started with a single poor decision not to monitor the ten active
developers efforts, or whether it is a greater problem of disparate attitudes
is not important at this point, more than six months after the fact.
You find it acceptable that an open source volunteer can do these things
contrary to the ideals and culture of "open source" and remain recalcitrant.
I however do not, and so would like the project that allows these problems to
go unresolved to stop unqualified distribution of my name and email. Had I
known when I left that the problems and the people would be continuing then I
would have changed the entries myself, and I doubt anyone would have
objected. Unfortunately I mistakenly believed that Schabell was recognised
for his true colours and despite being allowed to retire from office with
dignity  , was no longer a respected member of the community.
People have tried to rationalise individual complaints and problems, but
haven't addressed the big picture, so I keep repeating it hoping at some
point you will actually read the entire email and understand my position.
Every time that happens I get accused of personally attacking Schabell and of
needing to have the last word. I am used to it now, and as said here ,
they are other people's problems, I am not responsible for their inability to
deal with or to accept them.
 one reason, if not the primary reason for my leaving in disgust
More information about the SM-Discuss