[Foundation] voting update

Shawn Wilton shawn at black9.net
Tue Mar 11 00:47:17 CST 2003

Holy shiza.  Why the hell was I incinerated to the point of pure carbon 
and all he gets is a pat on the back?  Hot damn.

Ok, now in all seriousness, thanks to Peter for the hard work, but in 
all honesty, do try to slow down some.  None of this is a race.  XMPP is 
here to stay, there's no need to race to get this logo in to oscon.  

On another note, can we begin holding all meetings in duplicate?  I 
propose meetings 12 hours apart to maximize world convenience.  I would 
love to attend these meetings as I have a great deal to say, but like 
others I have fiduciary responsibilities that I can't neglect for XMPP.


Craig Kaes wrote:

> Peter, like others have expressed on this list, I am not satisfied 
> with the process which you proposed.  I thought that I might be, but 
> when the  logo that I liked best wasn't selected for the final six, I 
> recognized that I had been misled by you.  My friend worked for hours 
> on his image and it wasn't chosen and that sucks.
> Choosing a logo is going to be the most important activity performed 
> by the JSF this year and you have really cut out the membership on 
> this one.  If we are not empowered to choose the icon that represents 
> us, what good is it to be a member?  Oh, sure, you allowed us to 
> "vote" on an image and gave us the means to change the process 
> beforehand, but that doesn't really matter.  My buddy's logo wasn't 
> selected and that sucks.
> The real problem is that you feel that putting in insane amounts of 
> effort, not only in time but in emotional energy for which you receive 
> no compensation, gives you the right to make decisions for the JSF. 
> Hitler put in great amounts of time and energy too but you know where 
> that went.  Granted, you shared the decision making with the 
> "marketing group" and we were all free to join that group and didn't, 
> but that's because it wasn't advertised effectively enough.
> There should have been a concerted effort -- maybe even a full fledged 
> program to get the word of this Marketing group out to the membership. 
> We do have, afterall, a JEP process -- couldn't the logo selection and 
> marketing group joining processes be written up as a JEP to pass 
> through the council?  We could have easily worked with a temporary 
> logo during the six months that would have taken.  Market awareness is 
> overrated. People could get used to the new image and, in time, come 
> to associate it with us.  Just like the old one.
> You know why I think you didn't?  Because you never wanted us to be 
> involved.  You are on a power trip, my man!  I see you as a fascist 
> and now wonder if Nazis are in control of the JSF.  I suspect that 
> they are and have been for quite some time.  I resent that you have 
> been hiding this from us for so long.  I ask all members to remain 
> vigilant against this form of tyrrany.  United, we can stand against it.
> --C
> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> I just got off the phone with the conference coordinator at O'Reilly. He
>> informs me that if we send our logo to them by March 19 or 20, they will
>> be able to squeeze our logo in. So, in order to give us the maximum 
>> amount
>> of time to choose the logo contest winner, and in order to meet all the
>> requirements of Section 3.4 of the Bylaws, we are going to once again 
>> but
>> for the last time change the process.
>> 1. Proxy voting via memberbot will continue through Wednesday, March 19.
>> And of course, discussion can continue on this list while we debate the
>> alternatives.
>> 2. We will hold an official meeting of the members on March 20 @ 
>> 18:00 UTC
>> in foundation at conference.jabber.org in order to accept any in-meeting
>> votes and then to validate the results, thus completing the logo 
>> selection
>> process. This email is the official 10 days' notice of that meeting.
>> The consensus in the open, publicly-announced Marketing meeting just 
>> ended
>> [1] was that this will provide enough time to discuss and vote on the
>> finalists, yet still meet our deadline with O'Reilly.
>> Peter
>> [1]
>> http://www.jabber.org/chatbot/logs/conference.jabber.org/foundation/2003-03-10.html
>> -- 
>> Peter Saint-Andre
>> Jabber Software Foundation
>> http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php
>> _______________________________________________
>> Members mailing list
>> Members at jabber.org
>> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members

More information about the Members mailing list