Re: pvanhoof issue (was: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap)

[Philip Van Hoof <pvanhoof gnome org>]

On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 19:20 +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:

[cut]

> Thing is that Philip had been using the word 'we' quite a lot in the
> recent endless discussions ... [cut]

> I didn't complain so far because it wasn't always 100% clear if he
> means 'all GNOME developers' by 'we' until now where he made it
> perfectly clear.

>  Now that that is sorted out, I would like the foundation to forbid
> him from doing so in future. [cut]

> ... and despite all efforts from Philip & Lefty "we" have yet to
> see any compelling reason to change that definition.

You must mean "I" here when you ask the foundation in the same E-mail to
forbid this specific usage of the word "we".

On top of that are you now talking on behalf of me without my consent:
You claim that I want to draw a line between GNOME and FSF. Not true.

I'd also like ask Jonathon Jongsma, Zeeshan Ali and Dodji Seketeli to
stop their personal attack. If you want to ignore me, then just do so.

I believe your behavior already is forbidden by GNOME's code of conduct.


Cheers,


Philip

-- 
Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer
home: me at pvanhoof dot be 
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org 
http://pvanhoof.be/blog
http://codeminded.be