Received: by 10.220.70.75 with SMTP id c11mr2380876vcj.18.1251847647684; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:27:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.70.75 with SMTP id c11mr2378553vcj.18.1251847310699; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from rosenlaw.com (rosenlaw.com [192.220.47.202]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 23si580499vws.2.2009.09.01.16.21.50; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of lro...@rosenlaw.com designates 192.220.47.202 as permitted sender) client-ip=192.220.47.202; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of lro...@rosenlaw.com designates 192.220.47.202 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lro...@rosenlaw.com Received: (qmail 92631 invoked by uid 12234); 1 Sep 2009 23:21:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO Lawrencei) ([208.106.45.202]) (envelope-sender ) by 192.220.47.202 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 1 Sep 2009 23:21:49 -0000 From: "Lawrence Rosen" To: References: <86B5D995-F64A-4412-A4CA-180CA14B0938@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [Open Web Board] Re: Setting Course Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 16:21:42 -0700 Message-ID: <003a01ca2b5a$f7503400$e5f09c00$@com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003B_01CA2B20.4AF15C00" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AcorRxCRG/wv3SDXQAezbgH/0kEULgAALWNbAARgVsA= Content-Language: en-us ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01CA2B20.4AF15C00 Content-Type: text/plain Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote: My point is that this has proven to be impractical. I can't put more time into the OWF and I have been unable to get others to put any significant time (other than David Rudin). We need real resources that can be counted on to get work done or we will be having these same discussions for a few more years. I think a year is long enough to give the current system a try. Eran, I'm sorry that you're already feeling frustrated with us. I agree that David Rudin has worked hard, and so have you, and you deserve credit for that. But others of us are just now joining the board and we're here to help guide this organization forward. You needn't (and shouldn't) try to do it all yourself. Tantek and I just today learned how to connect to open-web-board@. Others of us are just back from vacation. Give us a chance to get focused. One thing I personally would appreciate is a report at the board meeting from the Infrastructure Committee. I'm sure they haven't had a lot of time to get started but they must have some ideas of what to do first. How about a short proposal? I personally don't need a report from the Legal Committee, although others on the board may want one. That's most of what we've been talking about for the last year. But what we do need is an infrastructure so we can post our draft Specification License and receive specific comments from the public. Does anyone know how best to do that? Meanwhile, I'd like to hear nominations for a chair of the Legal Committee. (NOT ME!) Someone needs to lead our CLA-drafting effort. Best regards, everyone, and let's get going! /Larry From: open-web-board@googlegroups.com [mailto:open-web-board@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Eran Hammer-Lahav Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 2:04 PM To: open-web-board@googlegroups.com Subject: [Open Web Board] Re: Setting Course On 9/1/09 1:57 PM, "Scott Wilson" wrote: a small number of very committed individuals is needed to make things happen My point is that this has proven to be impractical. I can't put more time into the OWF and I have been unable to get others to put any significant time (other than David Rudin). We need real resources that can be counted on to get work done or we will be having these same discussions for a few more years. I think a year is long enough to give the current system a try. EHL ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01CA2B20.4AF15C00 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: [Open Web Board] Re: Setting Course

Eran  Hammer-Lahav wrote:

My point is that this has proven to be impractical. I can’t put more time into the OWF and I have been unabl= e to get others to put any significant time (other than David Rudin). We need re= al resources that can be counted on to get work done or we will be having thes= e same discussions for a few more years. I think a year is long enough to giv= e the current system a try.

Eran, I'm sorry that you're already feeling frustrated with = us. I agree that David Rudin has worked hard, and so have you, and you deserve credit for that. But others of us are just now joining the board and we're = here to help guide this organization forward. You needn't (and shouldn't) try to= do it all yourself.

 

Tantek and I just today learned how to connect to open-web-b= oard@. Others of us are just back from vacation. Give us a chance to get focused. =

 

One thing I personally would appreciate is a report at the b= oard meeting from the Infrastructure Committee. I'm sure they haven't had a lot = of time to get started but they must have some ideas of what to do first. How about a short proposal?

 

I personally don't need a report from the Legal Committee, although others on the board may want one. That's  most of what we've = been talking about for the last year. But what we do need is an infrastructure s= o we can post our draft Specification License and receive specific comments from= the public. Does anyone know how best to do that? Meanwhile, I'd like to hear nominations for a chair of the Legal Committee. (NOT ME!) Someone needs to = lead our CLA-drafting effort.

 

Best regards, everyone, and let's get going!

 

/Larry

 

 

From: open-web-board@googlegroups.com [mailto:open-web-board@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Eran Hammer-La= hav
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 2:04 PM
To: open-web-board@googlegroups.com
Subject: [Open Web Board] Re: Setting Course

 




On 9/1/09 1:57 PM, "Scott Wilson" <scott.bradley.wil...@gmail.com&= gt; wrote:

a small number of very committed individuals is needed to make things happen


My point is that this has proven to be impractical. I can’t put more = time into the OWF and I have been unable to get others to put any significant ti= me (other than David Rudin). We need real resources that can be counted on to = get work done or we will be having these same discussions for a few more years.= I think a year is long enough to give the current system a try.

EHL

 

------=_NextPart_000_003B_01CA2B20.4AF15C00--