Process problem with the election.

Folks,

I am afraid that there's been a process problem with the election.

The secretary, who is in charge of releasing the election platform
announcement, chose to announce my candidacy to spi-general by posting a
very large flame about me.

Now, if this had gone correctly, the secretary would have announced my
candidacy with a nicely-worded statement containing the location of the
platforms of all of the candidates, and a call to begin the vote. Then,
and only then, he might have chosen to engage in debate. Hopefully in a
more civil manner, and in a way that was fair to all candidates.

I think the way this went was unfair to me, and it seems to me that the
election is a bit tainted by it.

I had no idea that I rubbed John so badly, and at least two years of
feeling all seems to have come out at once.

I do not want to reprimand or penalize anyone, I don't want to hurt John
in any way. I just wish I could push reset and make what just happened
go away.

Thanks

Bruce

John Goerzen wrote:
> Bruce Perens wrote at
> http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/votes/vote5/nominations/BrucePerens.txt:
>
>
>> I know of few people who do as much for Free Software as I. You can see
>>
>
> I could name hundreds that do more, and that's just people that I know
> of that post on debian-devel. All I've seen you do lately is stir up
> flamewars. Frankly, we don't need big egos around that loudly
> proclaim "few people do as much for Free Software". We need people
> that are willing to pitch in and do more than is expected of them.
>
> We need people that have a real passion to make SPI come alive.
>
> Some of them are running in this election, which is absolutely GREAT.
>
> We don't even need people that have done lots for Free Software. We
> need people that are dedicated to SPI and its cause.
>
> I've bit my tongue about you for a few years now, out of respect for a
> fellow candidate for the board, a fellow member of it, and out of a
> need to be a force for unity and progress as president.
>
> I am not running for re-election this year, so I'll be off the board.
> I have no more need to be overly diplomatic about this.
>
> I was hoping you would not be running again, so we could be rid of
> this problem without having to drag these things up.
>
> I am still a contributing member to SPI, though, and I WILL be
> voting. You will not get my vote.
>
>
>> that on my resume at http://perens.com/Bio.html . Richard Stallman does
>> more, indeed he dedicates his entire life to it to the exclusion of all
>> else. For that we should honor him. I am a husband and the parent of a
>> wonderful six-year-old, and that's mission #1. Hopefully you are
>> satisfied with Free Software being #2.
>>
>
> I would be happier if you would actually show up for board meetings.
> You were at only 4 meetings in the last year. That's 29% attendance,
> and you missed enough that the Board would have been within its rights
> to expel you under the Board Meeting Attendance Policy.
>
> I would also dispute the assertion that most of the real business at
> SPI is on a mailing list. Preparations, perhaps, but each month's
> board meeting by far accomplishes more than the past month's
> discussions in e-mail. But how would you know?
>
> Your participation in important email discussions was also minimal.
> Your offers to pitch in and volunteer to spend time to help with
> problems were, well, nonexistant.
>
> When was the last time the SPI board approved a resolution in email?
> It's been *ages*.
>
>
>> or at a meeting on Free Software community business. As most of the real
>> business of SPI is on a mailing list, that's not been too bad. The
>>
>
> Well, your terrible attitude about attendance has contributed to us
> missing quorum on more than one occasion. You didn't even bother to
> send regrets except for *one* meeting in the past year. That's right,
> you missed NINE meetings without even telling anyone. Others
> took time out of their evenings, or days at work, to be there, but you
> couldn't even be bothered to tell us that we needn't bother because
> you wouldn't be there.
>
> I think that the era of do-nothings on the SPI board ought to be long
> over. You are all air and no do. You do the absolute minimum that
> you have to in order to stay on the board. I get the feeling that you
> are doing this just to be able to put it on your resume.
>
> Heck, two people that AREN'T EVEN ON THE BOARD were at more meetings
> than you.
>
> And when you do get involved, it's usually to make misleading comments
> to outsiders.
>
>
>> hardest part of SPI is the treasurer's job, and that's not one I'm
>> well-suited for. I am, however, encouraged by the process in moving much
>> of this work to paid professionals.
>>
>
> I am heartened that you are no longer trying to make SPI move all of
> this to your own personal assistant.
>
> You do not get a free ride at this organization because of your
> history with it. (Which, those who were around back then, will recall
> was not entirely positive either.)
>
> -- John
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spi-private mailing list
> Spi-private(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
> http://lists.spi-inc.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/spi-private
>