Adam Miller said the following on 02/03/2010 08:02 AM Pacific Time:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:36 AM, John
Poelstra<poelstra(a)redhat.com> wrote:
<snip>
> These are *working drafts and in process documents* all the in spirit of
> transparency. It would be more helpful to these discussions to get
> clarification on advisory-board first rather than conclude that the
> board has run off the rails by using words like "letting" and
"allowing"
> in documents that are brainstorming and unfinished.
>
> I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that we've posted all meeting
> recaps to advisory-board list and there has been ZERO discussion or
> inquiries there. We specifically asked for feedback to the original
> list of "unanswered questions" on advisory-board. Is there a particular
> reason you did not respond there?
>
>
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2010-January/0078...
>
> I feel like you are discounting the board's efforts and misdirecting a
> lot energy by launching a new thread here with your "concerns" before
> first getting clarification on advisory-board.
>
I'm not on some crusade to undermine the Board if that's what you
think, I'm honestly looking for clarification but not only from those
involved in the Board but the community as well and both are located
here on this list. I don't see why it matters where the questions are
asked, just so long as they are asked.
Thanks for your clarification. I think it is great to ask questions, I
ask a lot of them myself. I question how productive it is to all of us
though, to ask questions if the starting point of those questions is
incorrect.
My sense here was that a few words on a wiki page struck you the wrong
way so instead of going to the people that wrote them by asking, "Hey,
what do you guys mean? These _______ things concern me for these
reasons." It was first asked instead to a mailing list that didn't
write them :).
I specifically requested feedback on advisory-board for this very
purpose and received no responses. Is there something I could have done
better on advisory-board list to engage the people that have
participated so freely here?
As far as replying to the advisory-board mailing list first, I will be
sure to do so in the future. I apparently forgot my place in the
hierarchy for a moment. Apologies for not following protocol.
I didn't mean to imply that you'd broken any rules. I thought we might
be able to have a more productive discussion if we had an accurate
starting point.
John