Re: [gentoo-nfp] Please communicate with us verses blogging at us

[Wulf C. Krueger]

On Tuesday, 22. January 2008 07:10:32 Square Bottle wrote:
> > Is he leading people here, or is he just telling them to come here
> > and expecting them to do so?
> > Think about it.
> Okay, I've thought about it, and I still don't think that he posted on
> his blog that people should join this list because he wanted it to be
> a secret, which was my original point.

No, he doesn't want it to be secret. On the contrary: He's (ab)using you - 
the users openly.

He *sends* you here without participating himself because it suits his 
purpose of stirring up things even and raise the pressure on people. To 
make them bend to *his* will. 

Robbins doesn't really try to communicate openly and *with* anyone but he 
*preaches*. Admittedly, he's very good at that.

Just read his latest blog entry: Paul is the good guy - he appologised to 
Robbins, welcomes the return of our overlord. Grant instead "downplayed 
the state of affairs", Robbins writes. Grant did not "give his opinion" 
or "discussed things" but "downplayed" them. Robbins effectively tries to 
play out the two remaining out against each other. Nice manipulative 
writing.

Robbins also did not try to communicate openly - instead, he called Grant 
on the phone. Wouldn't it have been nice to try to discuss things openly 
on this mailinglist? After all, isn't openness what Robbins pretends to 
have in mind? Or maybe openness is only good as long as people share 
Robbins' ideas of how things should be run?

Grant also "tried unsuccessfully to start a conversation about what the 
Foundation's role should be". How can one try *unsuccessfully* to start a 
conversation unless the other participant is not really willing to 
actually discuss things?

"I did place a deadline on my offer for a reason", yes, Robbins did that 
for a reason. It was an attempt to force things into motion without 
giving people time to even *think* rationally about it.

"he [Grant] seems to be trying resolve the current Gentoo leadership 
crisis by continuing to serve as a trustee. He did not express interest 
in resigning.". Another nice manipulative attempt at pushing people to 
certain conclusions - resolving the leadership crisis by staying as a 
trustee nicely implies that Grant wants to be the leadership. 

Actually, Grant expressed here explicitly that it might not be a good idea 
to stay as a trustee (but how would Robbins know, not even being here). 
It serves Robbins' purpose, though, as he's basically telling people that 
the current "leadership" failed (which he made sure to let people know) 
in their role but still intends to "usurp" their current position. 
(Which, of course, would be his to do.)

"I [Robbins] am not willing to participate in some kind of 
Foundation-managed process to figure out what to do next with Gentoo.", 
no, because that would leave him in the position *among* us and not 
towering *above* us. Everything Robbins suggested on his blog could be 
achieved without him becoming Gentoo's "Great Dictator" but did he 
suggest it to us via any of our official channels? No, he didn't because 
stirring up things to return to Gentoo as its perceived saviour is his 
motivation.

Yes, Robbins is pretty good at manipulating people. 

> If he didn't want to be open about this
> stuff, he would not have posted to his blog, or taken the time to talk
> to the foundation members that are still around, or posted a link to
> this announce list.

If he wanted to really *discuss* things, he would come here himself from 
his lofty heights. Instead he blogs and sends you here to put pressure on 
us. Is *that* the way to manage Gentoo? I don't think so.

-- 
Best regards, Wulf