Structure of FSFE

[Bernhard Reiter]

Stefano,

On Monday 30 April 2007 11:36, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> But first we must
> acknowledge that we have small problems and that we must (and can) solve
> them. Reality will not improve if we keep repeating internally what we
> try to project externally.

this discussion list is the "public", though not necessarily external.
Internally and public FSFE has admitted that it is not perfect several times
before. No organisation is.

> FSFE is currently underperforming and missing trains. 
> Denying it will be utterly unwise and will not help at all.

I disagree with that "missing trains" view and thus there is nothing to deny.
Given the concrete subject, I have pointed out my reasons here in public.
Usually there is a lot more information available internally, 
which is unavoidable for a few practical reasons.
This is why think we should better clarify this internally first;
but back to the concrete case at hand:

There are nine people legally responsible for FSFE and several more
team members that actually constitute FSFE. For your Anti-OOXML-action plan,
you have not gotten a clear majority from them so far. 
This let to the non-funding of the entry-free for a comittee to fight OOXML 
in Italy for a different organisation. 
So far I still believe this was the right decision.
I am still listening to arguments, of course. 

Bernhard
-- 
FSFE -- Coordinator Germany                                   (fsfeurope.org)
Your donation makes our work possible:  www.fsfeurope.org/help/donate.en.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20070430/bf0be5b1/attachment.sig>