[Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

[phoebe ayers]

On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 11:32 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 March 2012 05:03, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I am sorry to say that unless you are prepared to put your foot down, and
>> represent the tens of thousands of people who expressed their views in the
>> (admittedly suboptimal) referendum, you risk becoming an irrelevancy – in
>> exactly the same way that doctors are irrelevant in an asylum where it's
>> the inmates who call the shots, and the doctors are only kept on for show,
>> to keep the public money coming in.
>
>
> Yeah, 'cos that worked so well applied to de:wp.
>
> You do realise this has become a toxic electoral issue for the board,
> with people who voted twice for the resolution now backpedalling?
>
>
> - d.

Just for the record, not sure where you got "voted twice"... There's
been one vote on each resolution.

And it was not raised as an electoral issue. I think that's a little
unfair to people (including myself) who are trying to do their best in
a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't situation.

all best,
-- phoebe