one more note. last week, rich brought to my attention that i should also clarify the agreements we had regarding my interaction with the board.
in response to being included in an unexpected email about governance on 7/7, i replied:
"for the record, i have communicated with the board not to include
me on private communications regarding governance first in an email on
january 16th (and a call to a board member on that same day) and another email
reminder on march 25th. i acknowledge that until this email, the board
has accommodated my request.
my understanding is that the info list is for
support. i respect the board's need to have private communications
regarding governance and likewise i hope that the board would respect my
need to not be burdened by that communication."
this understanding was a precondition to my attendance of the january 2011 board meeting. the board also made use of a public bettermeans workspace during january in preparation for the board meeting.
my time working with aten in july would have been better spent supporting the open board meeting initiative. when that didn't happen, i should have left and i'm sorry if subsequent to that anyone's time was wasted.
thanks again rich for the chat.
cheers,
tom