On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 18:54 -0800, Square Bottle wrote:
> 
> But I don't think that implying that he's trying to do this secretly
> doesn't really seem appropriate, in my personal opinion.

Had he not mentioned the conversations with the trustees. Would we have
know it took place? Granted we could also blame our remaining trustees
as well. But they aren't suggesting/dictating a radical change either.

>  While only
> barely qualifying as a two-way street due to the ability to comments,
> his blog still expresses his sentiments openly.

Is that an official medium to conduct foundational matters? If one is to
make suggestions or offers to or about the Gentoo Foundation. Shouldn't
they use official mediums?

The Gentoo Developers were discussing this issue on an internal mailing
list -core. If it weren't for a leak, Daniel wouldn't have blogged.
Which he made a choice to blog, instead of a post to a public ml, like
-nfp. Not even using the medium that informed him in the first place.

Seems like avoidance of communication to me. Which I have had friendly
communications with Daniel in the past. Likely would again in the
present and future. Why he would not participate, does bother me a
little, and leaves one to wonder.

> Also, he's not trying to keep this mailing list a secret. I actually
> joined this list because I saw his suggestion to do so on his blog,
> and I'm sure that many others joined it because they heard about it
> from him.

Sure, and while he is suggesting it to others. Is he following his own
advice?

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/amd64/Java