[Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

[Nathan]

On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 8:06 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 6 March 2012 00:57, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Well, in my opinion I haven't given much indication of what I
> > personally think on the issue at all, as I often explicitly ignored
> > speculation about my own personal views or motivations whether it was
> > right or wrong. I *have* spent a great deal of time explaining and (to
> > some extent) defending board consensus. I didn't think it was
> > especially worthwhile or relevant to talk about anything else, as the
> > board acts as a corporate body.
>
>
> If you act only in support of a view, and do not voice your concerns,
> I hardly think it's unfair to draw a conclusion to your opinions from
> your actions. It then comes across as odd and insincere to later say
> "actually, I disagreed with what I was doing." You can't claim your
> views are being misrepresented when it's your actions doing the
> representing.
>
> What stopped you from voicing your qualms?
>

I don't know about you, but I can imagine personally disliking the concept
of an image filter while simultaneously believing a resolution in favor of
it was the best position for the Board to take at the time. Compromise
isn't a four letter word. I'd say its more odd to call phoebe out for
taking all the criticism on board; surely that was the intent of many of
the critics, including yourself?