Hi Philip,
On Tue, 2019-06-11 at 11:56 +0200, Tobias Mueller wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-06-06 at 11:20 -0700, Philip Chimento via foundation-list
> wrote:
> > If elected to the board, how would you help to build trust and
> > collaborative working relationships among the directors, and encourage
> > healthy debate?
> I think this is a great question for all the candidates and I would be
> delighted to read statements of candidates who want to position
> themselves.
I don't particularly like bringing this up again, however, I do find it
sad that you never responded to this question.
I saw no purpose in that.
Also, I was surprised to
see that the archives have been updated recently but no public
statement has been made yet.
I am not intending to make any public statement. The board decided to make this change as a result of a private conversation with a person who was involved in that discussion, who intended that it be resolved without making a fuss.
To be specific you updated the minutes of 2018-05-29 on the 2019-07-08
adding[1]:
"""
* Code of conduct approval (Alexandre)
* Alexandre wants to have on the record that he disagrees with how
the board approved the CoC
"""
In contrast, your original summary on foundation-list read:
"""
[…], I am clarifying explicitly in this addendum that Alexandre Franke
was not present at the above board meeting (see list of attendees), and
that in the following board meeting he went on the record stating that
he disagreed with the outcome of the above votes.
"""[2], similar during the 2018-10-09 Board meeting [3]
Now. What strikes me is that this was a considerable misrepresentation
of what Alexandre said at the time, and the possibility of exactly such
a misrepresentation was a major concern in the discussion[4]. It may
appear like be a detail at first, but the fact that Alexandre voiced
his disagreement with *how* the vote happened and not with the
*outcome* of the vote is a fundamental difference. From his own
statement, we do not know whether or not Alexandre agrees with the
outcome.
That was how I read it at the time. I think the interpretation that I initially assumed is a reasonable interpretation of those words. I agree that yours is, too. I do not intend to argue about the meanings of words. I myself have no clue what Alexandre meant, as I was not part of the board when that discussion took place. Also honestly I don't care. The full extent of my involvement is that I inherited this action item from the 2017–2018 board.
Now, I do believe that mistakes like this can and do happen. But
considering the situation, do you think that Alexandre or any other
foundation member have grounds to trust you?
I don't get to decide whether people have grounds to trust me. People make up their own minds. But this insinuation is ridiculous.
