View Single Post
woody14619's Avatar
Posts: 1,455 | Thanked: 3,309 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY
#88
Originally Posted by wolke View Post
oh, didnt know that.
It's unbelievably refreshing to hear someone say that out loud and with sincerity. Thank you.

Originally Posted by wolke View Post
i honestly dont think one way or the other would have had more complaining, since just as many would win, and just as many would lose.
Which is why I didn't object to the process myself. All alternatives would lead to someone whining. I chose the one that would be least demeaning to both the winners and runners-up (because nobody here was a loser, in any respect).

Originally Posted by wolke View Post
i think that the most fair way to do it would have been to have the council accept a list of applicants, and have the final process done like the council election itself.
Even after the Coucil election, there was bitterness. Complaints about the "size of communities" and not having accurate representation by all devices... Again, the selection criteria was given to us, not self-chosen. CA was not to be a popularity contest, and I feel for the most part we were able to prevent that.

Originally Posted by wolke View Post
i dont think anyone on the council would want very much to take the device away from their fellow council-brethren; as a result, the council members stood a MUCH better chance of getting one than, say, itsnotabigtruck
Again, I note that I was not a participant, and my choices were based on merit. And frankly, given the nature of personalities in Council, and some recent conflict there-in, I can tell you that your assumption in this case is not at all true.

This is not the first time this week I've been called blunt.
__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post: