[Foundation-l] Volunteer Council - A shot for a resolution

[Thomas Dalton]

On 17/03/2008, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>  > On 17/03/2008, Chad <innocentkiller at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >
>  >> Looks like a typo to me. Perhaps "could take" was meant? And
>  >>  on that note, our freedom /was/ removed, in a sense. The idea of
>  >>  membership was revoked some time back.
>  >>
>  > Yes, I meant "could take". I apologise to anyone offended by that
>  > unintentional accusation.
>  >
>  > The idea of membership was revoked? I didn't think the foundation ever
>  > had members, it was incorporated without them. What do you mean?
>
> In the scramble to compose an e-mail it's  just as easy for Chad to use
>  the wrong word as for you. :-)
>
>  "Rejected" might be more to the point than "revoked"

Certainly, it was rejected, but that's not a removal of freedom, it's
a failure to grant freedom - a very different thing.