Re: [ADMIN] [ANNOUNCE] This list - CC date correction
Alan Pope
>> On 8 April 2011 10:17, Alan Pope <al...@popey.com> wrote:
>> >[...]
>> > The next CC meeting is due to be on the 17th April 2011 at 11:00 UTC
>> > and will be held in #ubuntu-meeting on freenode IRC. I'll send a
>> > reminder nearer the time.
>> >
>> > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CommunityCouncilAgenda
>> >[...]
>
>
>
> Is this 11 A.M., Greenwich Mean Time?
Bah! You know what, that's wrong. It should say 19th April. I'll
correct it now. Sorry.
It's 11:00 UTC.
Al.
--
sounder mailing list
sou...@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/sounder
David Gerard
> Bah! You know what, that's wrong. It should say 19th April. I'll
> correct it now. Sorry.
> It's 11:00 UTC.
> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=4&day=19&year=2011&hour=11&min=0&sec=0&p1=0
Excellent railroading! The meeting will be 12 noon on a Tuesday, when
I suspect most of us are at work. As is Alan, but his job is at
Canonical.
- d/
Paul Sladen
> As is Alan, but his job is at Canonical.
No it's not.
-Paul
Please resist making strongly worded statements without being in
commands of the facts. If one needs to ask for them first, by all
means do so.
Alan Pope
On 9 April 2011 00:40, David Gerard <dge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9 April 2011 00:37, Alan Pope <al...@popey.com> wrote:
>
>> Bah! You know what, that's wrong. It should say 19th April. I'll
>> correct it now. Sorry.
>> It's 11:00 UTC.
>> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=4&day=19&year=2011&hour=11&min=0&sec=0&p1=0
>
>
> Excellent railroading! The meeting will be 12 noon on a Tuesday, when
> I suspect most of us are at work.
We have an alternative time of 21:00 which may suit better. If people
prefer, topics can be bumped to the 21:00 meetings. I didn't specify
the time when I added the item to the agenda for discussion, but can
do if people prefer it.
> As is Alan, but his job is at Canonical.
Contrary to popular opinion I'm not an employee of Canonical.
Al.
Samuel Thurston
> Hi David,
>
> On 9 April 2011 00:40, David Gerard <dge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 9 April 2011 00:37, Alan Pope <al...@popey.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Bah! You know what, that's wrong. It should say 19th April. I'll
>>> correct it now. Sorry.
>>> It's 11:00 UTC.
>>> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=4&day=19&year=2011&hour=11&min=0&sec=0&p1=0
>>
>>
>> Excellent railroading! The meeting will be 12 noon on a Tuesday, when
>> I suspect most of us are at work.
>
> We have an alternative time of 21:00 which may suit better. If people
> prefer, topics can be bumped to the 21:00 meetings. I didn't specify
> the time when I added the item to the agenda for discussion, but can
> do if people prefer it.
>
Ah I didn't see this when I sent my other post :/
This 21:00 timeslot puts it at the end of my workday and it's more
realistic that I'll be able to attend this one in reasonably good
spirits.
Samuel Thurston
>
> On 9 April 2011 00:40, David Gerard <dge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 9 April 2011 00:37, Alan Pope <al...@popey.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Bah! You know what, that's wrong. It should say 19th April. I'll
>>> correct it now. Sorry.
>>> It's 11:00 UTC.
>>> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=4&day=19&year=2011&hour=11&min=0&sec=0&p1=0
>>
>>
>> Excellent railroading! The meeting will be 12 noon on a Tuesday, when
>> I suspect most of us are at work.
>
> We have an alternative time of 21:00 which may suit better. If people
> prefer, topics can be bumped to the 21:00 meetings. I didn't specify
> the time when I added the item to the agenda for discussion, but can
> do if people prefer it.
>
>> As is Alan, but his job is at Canonical.
>
> Contrary to popular opinion I'm not an employee of Canonical.
>
Alan, Checking back on the wiki page no time is yet listed for this
item on the community council agenda. If I read this page correctly,
if the item is indeed bumped to 21:00 UTC, then it will be discussed
at the meeting May 3 instead of April 19.. is this correct?
Please clarify.
Regards,
Sam
Alan Pope
> Alan, Checking back on the wiki page no time is yet listed for this
> item on the community council agenda. If I read this page correctly,
> if the item is indeed bumped to 21:00 UTC, then it will be discussed
> at the meeting May 3 instead of April 19.. is this correct?
>
> Please clarify.
>
That's right. Yes.
There's been a lot of feedback since the original proposal, and I'm
happy to collate that and present it objectively at either meeting.
It's often difficult to get the entire CC to meetings, so sometimes
there's not enough to make a decision there and then. But it's worth
discussing. It's not a foregone conclusion as some have suggested, and
the fact that I raised it and I'm on the CC doesn't really make any
difference, if anyone had added it to the agenda it would have been
considered the same way.
Cheers,
Al.
David Gerard
> There's been a lot of feedback since the original proposal, and I'm
> happy to collate that and present it objectively
Given your own behaviour so far on this list, I'm afraid your claim of
being able to present it objectively comes across as delusional. You
are not a credible actor.
Who else can be present at *both* IRC times, to make sure this isn't
railroaded through?
- d.
Cybe R. Wizard
David Gerard <dge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11 April 2011 22:34, Alan Pope <al...@popey.com> wrote:
>
> > There's been a lot of feedback since the original proposal, and I'm
> > happy to collate that and present it objectively
>
>
> Given your own behaviour so far on this list, I'm afraid your claim of
> being able to present it objectively comes across as delusional. You
> are not a credible actor.
>
> Who else can be present at *both* IRC times, to make sure this isn't
> railroaded through?
>
>
> - d.
>
Alan, please don't think that David Gerard speaks for anyone but
himself. I don't know where he is coming from with his apparent
antipathy toward you but it is unwarranted, as far as I can see.
...regardless of what you may think of or wish for the Sounder group.
Cybe R. Wizard
--
Registered GNU/Linux user # 126326
Registered Ubuntu User # 2136
Basil Chupin
On 11 April 2011 22:34, Alan Pope <al...@popey.com> wrote:There's been a lot of feedback since the original proposal, and I'm happy to collate that and present it objectivelyGiven your own behaviour so far on this list, I'm afraid your claim of being able to present it objectively comes across as delusional. You are not a credible actor.
He has given the hint that he has now given it some thought, after obviously reading the comments made by list members, about his declaration of intent and his official ANNOUNCEMENT in this list, but now has indicated that he is happy to collate those views/comments made to date by this list's members for and against his pronouncement and is thus now prepared to present to the CC a list of such fully collated comments, for and against his pronouncement (assuming that they also will include those yet to be made just prior to such a list being presented at the CC).
It would be nice - no, essential! - to have it stated here, in summary form at the least, and therefore in writing, what that final presentation of his shall be re this matter to the CC at the appointed date and time.
(Being in a reflective mood at the moment, I think that this may be, just MAY be, an example for all people to consider what they express as an initial thought about something before actually expressing it in a public forum.)
If there ARE to be any changes made, but which do not totally wipe out this essential forum, then I suggest that it is that this mail list should NOT be archived NOR should it be allowed to be archived by that scourge of the modern internet world - 'google-doogle'. (Anyone know what is the basis for the 'word' "google"?)
BC
--
Great Man reaches complete understanding of the main issues; Petty Man reaches complete understanding of the minute details."
Confucius
Avi Greenbury
> He has given the hint that he has now given it some thought, after
> obviously reading the comments made by list members, about his
> now has indicated that he is happy to collate those views/comments made
> to date by this list's members for and against his pronouncement and is
> thus now prepared to present to the CC a list of such fully collated
> comments, for and against his pronouncement (assuming that they also
> will include those yet to be made just prior to such a list being
> presented at the CC).
He said this in his first email in the thread:
> It can of course also be discussed on this list, and at the meeting
> I'll do my best to objectively pull together opinions and proposals
> from those not present.
> (Anyone know what is the basis for the 'word' "google"?)
At the risk of missing some perhaps obvious sarcasm, it's a corruption
of 'googol', a term for 10^100, which I think was named so when a
mathematician asked his young daughter what he should call it.
--
Avi
Cybe R. Wizard
Basil Chupin <blch...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> (Anyone know
> what is the basis for the 'word' "google"?)
10 to the hundredth power = googol
Cybe R. Wizard
--
Registered GNU/Linux user # 126326
Registered Ubuntu User # 2136
--
Kevin Hunter
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 17:38:19 +1000 Basil Chupin wrote:
>> (Anyone know
>> what is the basis for the 'word' "google"?)
>
> 10 to the hundredth power = googol
The three or four folks who've answered are correct, but if you're like
me, you like answers "from the source":
http://www.google.com/corporate/history.html
Look to 1997.
Cheers,
Kevin
Samuel Thurston
repost this message for your perusal.
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Alan Pope <al...@popey.com> wrote:
> On 11 April 2011 22:26, Samuel Thurston <sam.th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Alan, Checking back on the wiki page no time is yet listed for this
>> item on the community council agenda. If I read this page correctly,
>> if the item is indeed bumped to 21:00 UTC, then it will be discussed
>> at the meeting May 3 instead of April 19.. is this correct?
>>
>> Please clarify.
>>
>
> That's right. Yes.
>
> There's been a lot of feedback since the original proposal, and I'm
> happy to collate that and present it objectively at either meeting.
> It's often difficult to get the entire CC to meetings, so sometimes
> there's not enough to make a decision there and then. But it's worth
> discussing. It's not a foregone conclusion as some have suggested, and
> the fact that I raised it and I'm on the CC doesn't really make any
> difference, if anyone had added it to the agenda it would have been
> considered the same way.
>
> Cheers,
> Al.
Cheers indeed. Be careful Alan, your other face is showing.
And lest you feel like I am personalizing this, I would be just as
pissed at anyone else who had added it to the agenda and then lied to
me about it as I am at you.
Douglas Pollard
successful unmoderated. To fail to manage a list and then shut it down
because of a failure to manage, demonstrates a toal lack of thought on
somebodies part. You people have failed in your job. There are people
right here on this list that can moderate and manage this list in a
proper and fair manner. This list can then be a supplier of input of
value. Doug
Samuel Thurston
What's really amazing Douglas, is that by and large this list HAS been
a net supplier of "input of value" in the absence of moderation! The
list's failure is one of not meeting an arbitrary and unstated set of
goals. That's tough to accomplish even with moderation in place.
Mike Basinger
Mike
--
Mike Basinger
mike.b...@ubuntu.com
Michael Haney
credibility with the community. The community will not let this
happen without consequences.
If Sounder closes, I suggest flooding Canonical with emails demand the
CC be disbanded and a new CC be voted into office, and the current
members be barred from running for the same positions. If they have
no integrity and will do something this underhanded then they do not
deserve to keep their positions. They forfeited their right to be on
the CC the day they voted to close Sounder knowing full well the
Sounder list was not to be one the agenda of that day's meeting.
--
Michael "TheZorch" Haney
"The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking
of morality by religion." ~ Arthur C. Clarke
"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion and
politics, but it is not the path to knowledge, and there is no place
for it in the endeavor of science. " ~ Carl Sagan
Visit My Site: http://sites.google.com/site/thezorch/home-1
To Contact Me:
http://sites.google.com/site/thezorch/home-1/zorch-central---contacts
Free Your PC from the Bondage of Windows http://www.ubuntu.com
Paul Sladen
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Alan Pope <al...@popey.com> wrote:
> > On 11 April 2011 22:26, Samuel Thurston <sam.th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > if the item is indeed bumped to 21:00 UTC, then it will be discussed
> > > at the meeting May 3 instead of April 19.. is this correct?
> ... added it to the agenda and then lied to me
AFAICT there's no lies here or there and nothing "underhanded" or
"deceitful". Reviewing the Ubuntu Community Council Agenda wiki
revision, no specific time was requested:
It shows:
Who What When
pleia2 Governance Boards (staffing, feedback/reports) 21 UTC
popey Shutdown sounder mailing list [none]
Had (any) individuals clicked [Edit] and appended a specific time it
would have been left until that occasion; which I believe tallies with
the reply to your query given by Alan Pope.
-Paul
Mike Basinger
On Apr 19, 2011, at 8:59 PM, Michael Haney wrote:
>
> If Sounder closes, I suggest flooding Canonical with emails demand the
> CC be disbanded and a new CC be voted into office, and the current
> members be barred from running for the same positions. If they have
> no integrity and will do something this underhanded then they do not
> deserve to keep their positions. They forfeited their right to be on
> the CC the day they voted to close Sounder knowing full well the
> Sounder list was not to be one the agenda of that day's meeting.
Canonical does not choose the Community Council, it is elected by a vote of all current Ubuntu Members (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Membership).
Mike
--
Mike Basinger
mike.b...@ubuntu.com
chris
> On 04/19/2011 10:14 PM, Samuel Thurston wrote:
> > In case it was unclear what I meant by underhanded and deceitful, I
> > repost this message for your perusal.
> I find it amazing that anyone would expect a mailing list to be
> successful unmoderated. To fail to manage a list and then shut it down
> because of a failure to manage, demonstrates a toal lack of thought on
> somebodies part. You people have failed in your job. There are people
> right here on this list that can moderate and manage this list in a
> proper and fair manner. This list can then be a supplier of input of
> value. Doug
>
well put
CT
Michael Haney
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Samuel Thurston wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Alan Pope <al...@popey.com> wrote:
>> > On 11 April 2011 22:26, Samuel Thurston <sam.th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > if the item is indeed bumped to 21:00 UTC, then it will be discussed
>> > > at the meeting May 3 instead of April 19.. is this correct?
>> > That's right. Yes.
>> ... added it to the agenda and then lied to me
>
> AFAICT there's no lies here or there and nothing "underhanded" or
> "deceitful". Reviewing the Ubuntu Community Council Agenda wiki
> revision, no specific time was requested:
>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CommunityCouncilAgenda?action=recall&rev=1454#General%20Agenda%20Items%20and%20Proposals
>
> It shows:
>
> Who What When
>
> pleia2 Governance Boards (staffing, feedback/reports) 21 UTC
> popey Shutdown sounder mailing list [none]
>
> Had (any) individuals clicked [Edit] and appended a specific time it
> would have been left until that occasion; which I believe tallies with
> the reply to your query given by Alan Pope.
>
> -Paul
>
You're side-stepping the issue. Allen Pope said the issue would NOT
be discussed until May. There for there was a lie and underhanded
dealings. If you are on the CC you do not deserve your position if
you close this list due with these issue unresolved.
Nobody was there to speak in support of Sounder because NOBODY KNEW
the issue was going to be brought up that day. We were all told it
was going to be in MAY. There therefore was underhanded. Please stop
trying to justify this unethical decision. Allen got caught in a lie.
If the CC goes forward with this based on a lie then it has no
credibility.
I'm submitting this issue to Techdirt and Reddit soon. The world is
going to know about this very soon. You have a chance to fix this
mistake before the court of public opinion attracts the attention of
people in higher positions who can remove you.
--
Michael "TheZorch" Haney
"The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking
of morality by religion." ~ Arthur C. Clarke
"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion and
politics, but it is not the path to knowledge, and there is no place
for it in the endeavor of science. " ~ Carl Sagan
Visit My Site: http://sites.google.com/site/thezorch/home-1
To Contact Me:
http://sites.google.com/site/thezorch/home-1/zorch-central---contacts
Free Your PC from the Bondage of Windows http://www.ubuntu.com
--
Cybe R. Wizard
Michael Haney <thez...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You're side-stepping the issue. Allen Pope said the issue would NOT
> be discussed until May. There for there was a lie and underhanded
> dealings. If you are on the CC you do not deserve your position if
> you close this list due with these issue unresolved.
+1
Cybe R. Wizard
--
Registered GNU/Linux user # 126326
Mike Basinger
Mike
--
Mike Basinger
mike.b...@ubuntu.com
Paul Sladen
> I find it amazing that anyone would expect a mailing list to be
> successful unmoderated.
It's a bit like Sauna. It's lovely, warm, relaxed and self-cleansing.
Until people who don't know the rules wander in; at that point either
peer-pressure quickly deals with the situation (people learn fast
or politely get asked to leave).
Failing that, the Sauna has probably become unlovely, unrelaxing, and
no doubt littered with broken beer bottles. When everyone who /was/
enjoying the sauna has walked out to go somewhere else and the hosts
have finally put out the fire it'll be ... cold too.
And that's where we're at. Well built Sauna though, it's taken over
six-and-a-half-years to cool down.
> There are people right here on this list that can moderate
What would you do?
* So far, some have failed to respond to the peer-pressure.
* Failed to show at a Community Council, or even put it on the Agenda.
* Notched up the offensive rhetoric afterwards thus proving the above
> This list can then be a supplier of input of value.
Could be (future tense). Has been (past tense). Is currently? (No).
-Paul (IMHO. E&OE)
chris
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:12:42 -0400
> Michael Haney <thez...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You're side-stepping the issue. Allen Pope said the issue would NOT
> > be discussed until May. There for there was a lie and underhanded
> > dealings. If you are on the CC you do not deserve your position if
> > you close this list due with these issue unresolved.
>
> +1
>
> Cybe R. Wizard
> --
> Registered GNU/Linux user # 126326
>
>
CT
Paul Sladen
> You're side-stepping the issue. Allen Pope said
Alan Pope said:
"if the item is indeed bumped to 21:00 UTC"
Did yourself or anyone else bump it "to [a] 21:00 UTC" slot?
> Nobody was there to speak in support of Sounder because NOBODY KNEW
> the issue was going to be brought up that day.
The item was added to the Community Council Agenda on 2011-04-07 20:56:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CommunityCouncilAgenda?action=diff&rev2=1452&rev1=1451
and announced to everyone on Sounder on 2011-04-08 09:17:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/2011-April/016351.html
the first sixteen words of the annoncement email are:
"I have added an [sic] proposal to the Ubuntu Community Council
agenda to shut the sounder list down."
and stating a time and place in the same email:
"The next CC meeting is due to be on the 17th April 2011 at 11:00
UTC and will be held in #ubuntu-meeting on freenode IRC."
Of course there was a typo in there, so 2011-04-08 23:37:
"You know what, that's wrong. It should say 19th April."
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/2011-April/016388.html
Which is still over 10 days notice.
> If the CC goes forward
Anyone is free to raise the topic with the Ubuntu Community Council:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CommunityCouncilAgenda (click [Edit])
> The world is going to know about this very soon.
Thanks to the public archives linked above, most people already do.
> the attention of people in higher positions who can remove you.
I am not a member of the Community Council:
"2009 Community Council vote complete"
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2009-October/000627.html
Membership is on a two-year basis. Vote early, vote often!
-Paul
Samuel Thurston
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Samuel Thurston wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Alan Pope <al...@popey.com> wrote:
>> > On 11 April 2011 22:26, Samuel Thurston <sam.th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > if the item is indeed bumped to 21:00 UTC, then it will be discussed
>> > > at the meeting May 3 instead of April 19.. is this correct?
>> > That's right. Yes.
>> ... added it to the agenda and then lied to me
>
> AFAICT there's no lies here or there and nothing "underhanded" or
> "deceitful". Reviewing the Ubuntu Community Council Agenda wiki
> revision, no specific time was requested:
>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CommunityCouncilAgenda?action=recall&rev=1454#General%20Agenda%20Items%20and%20Proposals
>
> It shows:
>
> Who What When
>
> pleia2 Governance Boards (staffing, feedback/reports) 21 UTC
> popey Shutdown sounder mailing list [none]
>
> Had (any) individuals clicked [Edit] and appended a specific time it
> would have been left until that occasion; which I believe tallies with
> the reply to your query given by Alan Pope.
>
> -Paul
As far as you can tell being the objective acronym. Alan:
1) stated that he would change the item to 2100 UTC to accommodate
more users' schedules
2) confirmed that this change would move the item to May 3.
Which part of that do you think is NOT deceitful?
Samuel Thurston
> The CC can not discuss a topic multiple times just to make it convenient for different time zones. I got up at 5am to discuss to attend the IRC meeting, surely someone from the 350+ members on the list could have attended to advocate for the Sounder community.
>
> Mike
I don't understand if you are following the discussion: Al stated he
would change the meeting time to 2100 UTC and confirmed this would
push the discussion to May 3. This was the SECOND time he gave an
incorrect time and date for the meeting, and the second one cannot
possibly be written off as a "mistake"
How am I supposed to show up for a discussion when a member of the CC
tells me it isn't happening when it's happening?