[svlug] Officers

Edward Cherlin echerlin at gmail.com
Fri Jan 25 05:33:58 PST 2008


On Jan 25, 2008 1:59 AM, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
> Edward Cherlin wrote:
>
> > Let's get this aired out.
>
> If you say so.  However, since you're making claims about me in public,
> I do request accuracy.

I thought that I was making a simple statement of fact, one which you
confirmed to me over the phone later on. You don't regard me as
interim president. End of story.

> (I know you've more recently retroactively attempted to un-say what you
> posted earlier today, but that unfortunately has left some inaccurate
> impressions on the membership, which you seem to want me to ignore, even
> though they were at my personal expense.  In a word:  No.)

I have no idea which statements you're talking about, but I deny the
imputation of bad faith. I did not unsay anything. I have not asked
you to ignore anything, nor did I wish you to ignore anything.

> > Rick has made it fairly clear that he does not regard me and Lisa as
> > officers by Paul's appointment.

When it became clear that my assumption about being interim president
was incorrect, I renounced it. I didn't unsay it. I don't even know
what that means. What did you want me to do instead?

> Wow, this sure makes me seem like I was somehow standing in your way.
> However, I was not.  To set the record straight:

I said no such thing, nor did I mean to imply it. You are reading much
more into my words than was there--a statement of fact.

I am not the President of SVLUG, not just in your mind, but in the
minds of a number of others. OK.

I can't give you orders. You offered to fulfill my request, for which
I thank you. It turns out that there is nothing you need to be
authorized to do, which you wouldn't be able to do if there was nobody
to authorize it. More simply, we don't need to have a President before
the election. I certainly don't need to be President for any personal
private reason, and it is now clear that I don't need to be President
for the good of the group.

Excellent. I never wanted to be President, and said so publicly.

> o  You requested me to do a rather _huge_ amount of writing work,
>    requesting that I post it here, and saying that you were making
>    that request as president.

Ah. I didn't realize it would be so huge. While I appreciate your
dedication to detail in many things, I think a summary report would be
fine for now. In any case, since nothing new needs to be done before
the election, there is no rush at all.

"Brie was in stress testing, and needs its missing bits, as mentioned
in an earlier post. When testing is finished, it will be set up with
?? Linux, and configured to serve ??."

I had no more than that in mind. A bit more than "Off again. On again.
Gone again. Finnegan" but not by much. And similarly for any other
current or offered boxes. Unless somebody else feels the need for
more.

> o  I replied that I would happily comply, _but_ that I would gladly
>    do the same for any SVLUG member -- including Alvin and Bruce, the
>    other (so far) declared candidates.

But not at that time, as far as I was aware. I had actually asked on
the list whether there were any other candidates, in which case I
would not try to act as interim President. Hearing from none, I
pressed on unknowingly into this morass.

> o  On the Volunteers list, I made my point a little clearer, in case
>    it had somehow been lost.  I said:
>
>       I'm just picturing Bruce, Alvin, or some other candidate
>       asking me why I unilaterally ignored their candidacies, and
>       realised I have no good answer.  If that seems highhanded
>       for any reason, imagine your and Bruce's situations to be
>       reversed, and reconsider.
>
> I have to wonder:  _Did_ you imagine what it was like if Bruce had
> asked me to disregard your candidacy?  _Did_ you reconsider the ethical
> dilemma you were trying to land me in?

More bad faith, is it? I deny it. I was in a state of mind that you
appear to be unable to imagine, and which I have no interest in
arguing about.

> So, to sum:
>
> 1.  I said "yes" to your request, even though it was going to chew up
>     a sh**load of my time, and even though some of your questions were
>     going to take a lot _additional_ time in prefactory explanation of
>     why you're questions had some wrong questions about how (e.g.)
>     Mailman works that I'd have to clarify before answering the
>     question you probably _meant_ to ask.

Thanks.

> 2.  Despite my saying "yes", and saying I'd do the same for
>     _any SVLUG member_, and just was trying to behave fairly and
>     impartially towards all candidates including (in particular)
>     you, so that I could _not_ be fairly accused of trying to run
>     SVLUG.... despite all that, you tell the membership I was
>     somehow standing in your way.

No. Never said it, never thought it. How do you get that from my plain
words? No, don't tell me. I really don't want to argue about it.

> I'm non-plussed.  Should I have told you "no"?  If neither "yes" nor
> "no" was OK, should I have gone with "mu"?
>
> Please elucidate, Ed.  I need help, here.

Any time.

> And, by the way, _thank you_, Alvin, for your response to Ed on this
> point.  Exactly, sir.  I couldn't have put it better.

You mean this nonsense?

personally, i think you are doing exactly what paul did ..
       - do things without assking the volunteers
       - making decisions of what to do
       - assume that you are "pres" so you can do as you wish
       and start making changes

I am being pilloried again for doing what volunteers and other recent
rebels asked me to do. Including Rick, who in person tells me and
others that he supports me to become President in the election.
Particularly when I said that I wanted to withdraw from the race. I
still do. Whether I will or not, I don't yet know. I *have* asked Lisa
whether she would be willing to run for President, and I would go for
VP.

I asked Rick to proceed with the program that we discussed before the
recent coup, which he had sent to Paul, who rejected it by not
answering Rick's e-mail. Now Rick says I shouldn't have asked, but he
didn't say that when I asked him to. I stated that a few of Paul's
more egregious actions were to be considered revoked. Now Rick and
Alvin say I shouldn't have tried to revoke them. I think. I have asked
others at every opportunity what would be good to do, and some have
complained at me for it, while others have accused me of wanting to be
a dictator.

I think that almost all of you people who post on this list are very
silly. But then, so am I. Anyway, I like all of you.

I should mention that the most reliable way of getting me angry is to
tell me what I think, particularly in a tone of "When I want to hear
_your_ opinion, I'll *tell* it to you." It is not nearly as effective
as it used to be, for which I am grateful. I hope you are, too.
-- 
Edward Cherlin
End Poverty at a Profit by teaching children business
http://www.EarthTreasury.org/
"The best way to predict the future is to invent it."--Alan Kay




More information about the svlug mailing list