[Foundation-l] Top posters

Tue Jun 3 18:36:40 UTC 2008

>  > I don't remember any major scandals in May - there was nothing much to
>  > talk about. There needs to be some disagreement in order to get lots
>  > of back-and-forth. Everyone agreeing that we're all very grateful for
>  > the excellent job Florence did as board chair doesn't make for a
>  > lengthy debate! Now, had she done a bad job, we could have had a
>  > brilliant discussion about it. So basically, you should blame
>  > Florence! ;)
>
> That's if we can consider her interaction with the community blameworthy.
>
>  Viewed in that light, is it too self-serving to say that two of us on
>  the top posters list are also current board candidates.

I think there's been some serious misunderstanding of my comment
(which I take responsibility for, I thought it was clear what I meant,
but obviously I was mistaken). I was just joking. One of the major
threads during the month was one where everyone congratulated and
thanked Florence for a job well done. This was a fairly short thread,
since everyone agreed that she'd done a good job so there was just one
email per person and the thread finished. Had Florence been a bad
chair, there would have been more disagreement among people commenting
prompting more discussion, so there would have been some
back-and-forth resulting in a much longer thread. I concluded from
that that the lower total activity during the month, and therefore
Milos' "winning", was down to Florence doing such a good job as chair,
and therefore Milos should blame her for him being top of the list
(which is generally considered a bad thing, hence the use of the word
"blame").

It was a light hearted comment and I meant no offence to anyone. It
was intended to be funny, but I clearly failed rather drastically -
you know a joke has failed when you have to explain it. Once again, I
apologise to anyone offended by my poor attempt at humour.