Who's moderating this forum?
m.z.rieux at gmail.com
Mon Jul 19 22:15:22 UTC 2010
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Paul Frields <stickster at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Marcel Rieux <m.z.rieux at gmail.com> wrote:
> It has little to do with the venue, and more to do with the tone
> you've brought to it, Marcel.
Yeah, of course, the tone! Whenever I try to bring people's attention
to matters they'd rather not care about, I'm told I don't have the
right tone. Isn't it funny that with all those people try to
intimidate me, finding absolutely necessary to add noise by telling
they filter me out, comparing me to a previous poster who was
apparently a troublemaker -- I have no idea if he really was -- or
spewing any nonsense like Rahul Sundaram does -- have you seen his
last post(1) where he pretends I'm sending him "abusive and rude
mails" while he doesn't change his return address --, isn't funny that
it's me that you find necessary to scold?
I believe those people are the ones you and Fedora/Red Hat should care
about... unless, of course, they're acting on "Fedora/Red Hat"
request. It's clear to me that if such is not the case, Rahul Sundaram
should be fired on the spot. How come he isn't?
Given those circumstances, I feel I'm acting pretty cool.
>>> The Board's information is located in a searchable
>> I searched with constitution and statuses and never got to the page. How the
>> Board is elected should be part of a constitution or statuses or, as we say
>> in French Règlements de Régie interne.
> Just because you prefer those terms does not make them logical for
> everyone. A simple search for "Board" would provide everything you
> need, whether you search on the Mediawiki or through Google ("Fedora
The constitution of the board should be part of the constitution or
statuses or Règlement de régie interne, whatever this is in english.
So it's normal to search for those terms. The fact that Fedora only
has rules for electing the board is not normal.
>> Unfortunately http://fedoraproject.org/wiki defaults to
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Project_Wiki and the words Board,
>> constitution or statuses are nowhere to be found on this page. I believe
>> there is still place for a little effort.
> The answer to every question is not to load yet more information on an
> already crowded front page.
Have you ever heard about links?
>>> Five seats on the Board are elected by the community at large, and
>>> four seats are appointed by the FPL. In past cycles, the community has
>>> elected both Red Hat employees and volunteers to Board seats, and the
>>> FPL has appointed both Red Hat employees and volunteers to Board seats.
>> Let's see the end result:
>> Doesn't work for RH:
>> Máirín Duffy -- a Boston-based Red Hatter who started as an unpaid intern in
>> 2004 and is now a senior interaction designer there.
> Máirín Duffy does work for Red Hat, as you indicate here.
So, "Red Hatter" means "working for Red Hat"? It's not everybody fond
of, or contributing to Red Hat? I must say I wondered about this one.
Since "there" was used instead of "here", I thought Máirín Duffy was
working as "senior interaction designer" there, in Boston.
"Interaction designer"! Can you believe this title? Does Google have
>> Chris Tyler is a professor at Seneca College
>> So, that's 5 to 5. Of course, people who don't work for Red Hat are srill
>> pretty close to Red Hat, which is normal. You don't expect Debian developers
>> to be part of the Fedora board.
> Great, so we agree that the Board's comprised of Red Hat employees and
> volunteers, and there are no requirements regarding employment either
No requirement either way. Only that the FPL, named by Red Hat,
appoints 4 seat on the board and, whoever in the community happen to
elect Red Hat employees seem to vote in an "appropriate way" so that
Red Hat employes and unconditional supporters are well represented.
Now, you can go on discussing this as much as you want. but the fact
remains that, in the end, Fedora is Red Hat's thing.
If it wasn't we could discuss here how Red Hat's introduction to the
NASDAQ was made. Even here, in Montreal, I had some echoes. I learned
that the shares were to be sold $8 and then, G&S decided that they
could get $14. What does this look like?
It looks like there was a leak that shares were offered at $8 on a
laddering deal. I don't have the papers in hand, but it certainly
looks like it. This is most likely what allowed Bob Young and his wife
-- how's she called? Linda? -- to be kicked out of Red Hat with
hundred of millions dollars. More people might have been involved in
this laddering scheme. They certainly should be brought to court by
Red Hat and investors to spew back a few hundred millions.
So, I left, this link to rollingstone.org:
and that nobody replied on this article.
I'm just a plain desktop user. As a former Fedora board member, even a
FPL, didn't you read the article? Do you really believe you can have a
business where investors have been ripped off of hundreds of millions
dollars running free for the rest of its existence? As an
administrator who has been named by Red Hat, what do you care about?
I posted the link for the first time here:
but it seems Google doesn't index the page:
Maybe I should write to the SEC or, you know, that lady of modest
origins that Taibbi talks about. She seems to care about investors.
Honestly, I can't fathom what somebody like you ever did on Fedora's
board. I don't mean to be rude, I just want you to explain what the
hell you were doing as a FPL while you weren't caring about business
More information about the users