[Foundation-l] Seat and Donations (SPLIT from: EFF & Bitcoins)

Fri Jun 24 01:20:58 UTC 2011

Michael Snow writes:

And for people who were worrying about the implications, I think setting

things up in stages is just as likely to make it look worse as to make it
> look
> better.
>

I think Michael's point here can't be overemphasized. It seems to me likely
that there would be just as much criticism and/or expressions of concern if
the Board appointment had been offset by a few months as there was when the
grant and the appointment occurred close in time. Perhaps there would have
been even more criticism, for the reasons Michael outlines. The fact that
the Board opted to go ahead with the appointment, knowing full well there
was a strong possibility their motivations would be questioned, is an
argument *in favor* of Matt's candidacy for a board appointment --
specifically, the Board felt Matt added so much value that it was worth the
risk that the appointment would be criticized as being a condition of the
grant.

--Mike Godwin