[Foundation] Re: jabber.com for president

Julian Missig julian at jabber.org
Thu Jun 28 23:25:42 CDT 2001

I am *not* a Jabber.com employee. I didn't speak up because I felt they
spoke well enough, but apparently you just see them as corporate
entities. The Jabber.com employees on the Jabber Council are on the
Council because they are *the people that made Jabber what it is* - I
have been involved in Jabber for quite some time now, but they were
involved before me. Every single one of them is great, I've met them in
person. They're easy to get along with and not imposing at all.
Apparently, however, there is some "situation" which has gotten "this
far" - if you could please explain, maybe we could sort out the problem.

All that I've seen so far is a few people expressing concern that
Jabber.com might dictate Jabber. If you really feel this way, call a
friggin revote and don't vote for Jabber.com people next time. That's
all there is to it. Since the Foundation membership is limited to 15%
per company, if *only* Jabber.com employees voted for Jabber.com
employees, they couldn't win.

However, most people (myself included) realize that these people on the
Council are there for a reason beyond company affiliation.

Jabber.com did not specifically select these people to run for them.
Each of them chose to do this on their own, so it's not Jabber.com's
fault. Blame Jeremie Miller, Peter Saint-Andre, Peter Millard, David
Waite, and Dave Smith for running for Jabber Council. If you have
specific issues with any of them, call a revote, or at least explain the
issues more than "correct the situation before it went this far"

And no, Jabber.com does *not* (at least, it *will not* once stuff gets
rolling if you consider it to be ruling it now) rule the Jabber
Foundation board. Some companies (mine included) have yet to announce
their board members. The board is not going to have much direct
influence over the technology to begin with, as I and others made sure
of. If you see something that the board can control that you don't like,
bring it up.

Please elaborate if you have any other problems. I'm just having a tough
time seeing this issue when *nothing has happened yet* - if something
happens, *we* as members of the foundation can call it to a vote and get
things changed. These people weren't elected out of pure chance...

excuse my message if it doesn't make sense... it's just starting to get
annoying because I do know these people personally and I have yet to see
any problems... the Council hasn't even done anything yet!

email: julian at jabber.org
jabber:julian at jabber.org

On 29 Jun 2001 01:49:38 +0000, Barry Lee wrote:
> Who are appointing these board members - Jabber.com???
> There is absolutely nothing wrong with the efforts of the people of
> Jabber.com. However no one entity should have this much weight on council
> or board influence.
> I noticed yesterday when Stephen Lee posted his comments that the first
> e-mails returned were from Jabber.com employees and they refered to other
> employees comments. It is and will be very hard to believe the b____ that
> this employees are all their own persons and their paycheck does not
> influence their decisions.
> You would think that the people at jabber.com would have realized the
> concerns that the membership at large would have and correct the situation
> before it went this far.
> Barr

More information about the Members mailing list