[LGM] Request For Comments - reorganizing financial tasks for LGM

[Louis Desjardins]

2016-05-20 15:35 GMT-04:00 Simon Budig <simon at budig.de>:

> Hi Louis.
>

Hi Simon,

>
> Louis Desjardins (louis.desjardins at gmail.com) wrote:
> > [...] Coming at the discussion late and pretending not to have read and
> > understood a single (valid to me) point I raise is mind boggling to me.
> > [...]
> > Not even trying to answer the following questions is a strange attitude
> > into this discussion.
>
> Is it really that easy to dismiss Femkes opinions? She was "late" and
> did not follow the structure you want this discussion to follow?
>

Entering late in an email discussion does not imply you have not taken the
time to read the thread! :)

At this point in the discussion, we’re not close yet to need opinions. We
are gathering the facts. Opinions will come after. We might not even need
them.


>
> > If we were sitting together at the same table, I am
> > pretty sure that it would be very difficult to stare at me while I
> > formulate those valid questions, without even bothering answering them.
> > It’s not big noise at the origin, with fearing of *"flame war"* (what
> flame
> > war?) and making the gratuitous assertion those ideas "*seem exceedingly
> > undesirable*" (have you read my previous long email?) that will make a
> > better decision arise.
>
> well, here you start arguing ad-hominem. So the fear of a flame war
> apparently was not exactly unfounded.
>

Sorry for the large quantity of infos and the long argumentation but as I
see it, the facts are simply missing and I hoped my long memo would have
answered most if not all questions.

>
> Yes, it would have been better to discuss these questions with you in
> person. Unfortunately that was not possible and there was no one else
> available to discuss even the most basic financial questions on a base
> of facts. It was a collection of hearsay and guesswork. And this is a
> huge problem.
>

You are right. One thing, as a suggestion, would have been to ask me, by
email.

That would have saved us from reading false on untrue on incorrect or
incomplete or gratuitous affirmations that are of not much help.

But it was in the end not necessary. I ended up writing that extensive memo.

Meanwhile, the circulation of the hearsay and guesswork has made some
people forge opinions that have now become premisses to the discussion. The
hard work is to clean up the table. We need some reverse engineering here!

Anyway, I am very sorry that this leads you to believe I am arguing ad
hominem when my goal is the exact opposite.

I am incline to think I am arguing *ad rem*, instead. Going after the
facts. Maybe it’s just a point of view.

>
> /me heads out for a walk to do some venting. I'll then hopefully be able
> to respond in a more constructive manner to your long mail.
>

> Bye,
>         Simon
>

/me going offline for the whole week-end, unfortunately heading to two
family funerals. Very, very sad times. I will catch up (read: I will read)
on Tuesday. Talk to you soon. Take care. I wish we could have had a beer
together in London. But that was not possible.

Bye,

Louis

p.s. I started to answer earlier and have now completed my email and I
discover that you came back from your walk and have written more and I have
to say at this hour that I am going home! But I understand much better now
what the issue is and I think it’s a very valuable info. More on Tuesday.
Meanwhile, wish me strength. I will need it.

>
> --
>               simon at budig.de              http://simon.budig.de/
> _______________________________________________
> Libre-graphics-meeting mailing list
> Libre-graphics-meeting at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libre-graphics-meeting
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libre-graphics-meeting/attachments/20160520/2da825c8/attachment.html>