[Foundation-l] Board members positions toward Jimmy's last action

[Milos Rancic]

On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 6:29 PM, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 3:14 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com> wrote:
>> By now, just two Board members explicitly stated what do they think
>> about Jimmy's action: Jan-Bart de Vreede and Ting Chen (who explained
>> his position in details).
>>
>> According to not precise Board's statement I may guess who supports
>> Jimmy's action and who doesn't. However, I don't want to guess. As a
>> member of community who directly or through the chapters elects five
>> Board members and other four through the delegation given to the
>> previous five members, I want to know positions of other Board
>> members.
>
> Well, we as a community don't require such individual statements about
> any other issue; I realize this may be a personal dealbreaker for you
> but it doesn't seem like the single most important issue of our day.
> I'd much rather hear what individual board members think about
> strategy or the budget, which is of much more lasting import for how
> the foundation gets run.

There are some political reasons of why I am here. And they are about
our values: all human knowledge... not censored... consensus
culture... building encyclopedia etc., not surrealistic comedy...

(Saying so, I am not talking in absolute terms: we are not able to
have all human knowledge, but the most important of; if people are
deciding what should be censored for themselves, I am fine; sometimes
we need [well planned] bold actions; sometimes it is nice to watch a
surrealistic comedy.)

Those values are *before* finances. We are here because of them, not
because of money or strategy. Money and strategy are here because of
our values.

And I don't feel that I am the only one who has the opinion similar to
the opinion described inside of my ask.