Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

[John Poelstra]

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 at 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/007886.html
>>
>> 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