[Noisebridge-discuss] Noisebridge Executive Director

[jim]

   i read that too. her response does not address 
the points specifically. 


On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 19:08 -0800, Rachel McConnell wrote:
> Guys, keep up!  Christie elaborated her objections a few emails ago:
> 
> https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2010-February/012701.html
> 
> jim wrote:
> > 
> >    as best i can tell, christie has not responded 
> > to requests for explanation of her objection to 
> > those who weren't there and she has not responded 
> > to specific points expressed to meet her objection. 
> >    please do so, christie; it would help the 
> > discussion a lot; as it is, it seems one-sided 
> > (your remark that we're going in circles is right 
> > partly because you're not responding to the points). 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 18:34 -0800, Jeff Tchang wrote:
> >> I don't seem to understand why this position is causing so much grief?
> >>
> >> I thought the generally process is that someone stands up and says
> >> they want to be ED. Then they campaign as to what they can do above
> >> and beyond the normal duties of the ED position as stated. Any
> >> objections get voiced and the candidate makes a public response.
> >>
> >> It seems to me the people that should be doing the most talking should
> >> be the people wanting to be ED?
> >>
> >> -Jeff
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Christie Dudley <longobord at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I guess what I'm trying to say is we're spinning around in circles and
> >>> nothing is getting resolved.
> >>> Correct me if I'm wrong on this:
> >>> - Everyone but me is totally happy with Mitch.
> >>> - People don't want to think about anyone else, despite my reservations
> >>> about Mitch.
> >>> Is there anything I'm missing?
> >>> Christie
> >>> _______
> >>> "We also briefly discussed having officers replaced by very small shell
> >>> scripts." -- Noisebridge meeting notes 2008-06-17
> >>>
> >>> The outer bounds is only the beginning.
> >>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/genriel/sets/72157623376093724/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Andy Isaacson <adi at hexapodia.org> wrote:
> >>>> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:51:05AM -0800, Christie Dudley wrote:
> >>>>> There's no reason not to just renominate Mitch...  but no one has even
> >>>>> tried to change my mind, other than by telling me flat out I'm wrong.
> >>>> I'm really confused, maybe I just can't parse multiple negatives.  If
> >>>> you want Mitch to be ED ("there's no reason not to renominate Mitch")
> >>>> then why do we need to change your mind?
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm sorry I wasn't at the meeting, but I haven't seen any statement of
> >>>> what your objections were.  I wasn't even aware that there were any
> >>>> objections until this thread started.  Could you explain any of your
> >>>> objections for the benefit of those of us who missed the discussion?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> -andy
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> >>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> >>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> >> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> >> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> >>
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>