[ADMIN] Additional moderator(s) sought for ubuntu-users list - clarifications

Cybe R. Wizard cyber_wizard at mindspring.com
Wed Sep 28 14:39:59 UTC 2011

On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:47:26 +0200
Oliver Grawert <ogra at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> > And all this time people were made to believe that their interests
> > were being looked after and promoted by Canonical's "Community
> > Council" when 'they' were plotting all the time to shutdown this
> > venue.  
> people were also asked to participate in the council meetings about
> the issues with sounder... iirc only noop and amendee showed up at the
> meeting where sounder shutdown was actually discussed, even though
> there was a notification mail to this list back then. 

Really?  That's very misleading and possibly intentionally.  What about
this from Samuel Thurston (full backtrack available from the Sounder

Quoted Sounder mail follows:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Paul Sladen <ubuntu at paul.sladen.org>
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Samuel Thurston wrote:  
>> that this item would be brought up at the next community meeting  
> This was not my understanding.  Of course you are free as anyone else
> to bring a topic to the Ubuntu Community Council:  (it's a wiki)  

I have already reposted the mail where pope confirmed that moving the
timeslot would put it at may 3.  I have not reposted the link where he
said he would move the time to 2100, but he did in fact say he was
going to do it.

>  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CommunityCouncilAgenda
>> I say this because I feel  
> Your personal feelings are no excuse for making unfounded, presumptive
> or baseless statements towards others.  Please keep it to the facts.  

My statements are well founded, documented and have a basis in
reality.  You seem to disagree but only on the assumption that I
should not have taken pope on his word.

> The transcript of the Ubuntu Community Council IRC meeting shows the
> lengths to which one particular member of the CC went to raise the
> suggestion of carrying the item over:  

He didn't suggest carrying the item over, he suggested it be discussed
at BOTH times rather than the time he said he intended to move it to.
Which, as we have been told (repeatedly), the CC can't be bothered to

>  http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2011/04/19/%23ubuntu-meeting.html#t12:18
>> I call foul on the entire CC.  
> Perhaps I've missed your IRC nickname in the IRC transcript.  Was
> there a point that you had raised during the discussion and which you
> feel was ignored or overlooked?

I was misled about the time of the meeting.  Had I known that this
would be the one and only discussion time I would have absolutely been
there.... I've already invested an unreasonable amount of time in
researching the character of the list's content and getting a feel for
how it should be handled, not to show up.

Now you can say "oh you can look at the wiki" and I can say to you, if
someone tells me something that is not true, and I fail to go and look
it up elsewhere to confirm, does that mean the person did not mislead
me in the first place?

Perhaps you think I should believe that two incorrect statements of
date were "accidentally" posted to the list, by the person motioning
for its shutting at the CC?

And maybe I'm just being paranoid that the outline I specifically
asked Pope to present was not presented, but that one of my statements
was twisted to seem in support of closing the list?
End quoted Sounder mail

Will we be similarly mislead about the closing of -users?  I wouldn't
be at all surprised.

Cybe R. Wizard
When Windows are opened the bugs come in.

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list