Thread: [Council] Community Awards: final results
View Single Post
itsnotabigtruck is offline itsnotabigtruck
2012-06-23 , 16:40
Posts: 245 | Thanked: 915 times | Joined on Feb 2012
#331
Originally Posted by Arie View Post
I suggest you send me in the right direction then, because from what I have seen, none of the above mentioned 3 from tmo or maemo.org have made major contributions to the level of e-yes or itsnotabigtruck.
Setting all of that aside, the real issue is the conflict of interest, not who "deserves" what. It's absolutely impossible for the judges to decide what they themselves deserve with any objectivity.

Originally Posted by nieldk View Post
This is where a lot of this is going sideways!
It was NOT a contest! Period! It was an AWARD!

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/contest
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/award
You're quibbling over semantics instead of defending the actions taken. The nominees contested over a set of awards - it's a contest. In any case, whether it is or not has nothing to do with the situation.

Originally Posted by freemangordon View Post
Actually there was one N950 sold for 920 pounds(or was it euros?) on e-Bay yesterday, so your calculations are wrong :P. But that is not the point.
I was being charitable to the council with those numbers. Valuing each N950 at $1434 (= £920), the council is laughing its way to the bank with $4702 in misappropriated awards (3x N950, 1x N9). That's only for those four phones - the total sum for the entire program is a fair bit more.

The motivation for greed is rather obvious.

-

That the councilors consistently sidestep the issue of conflict of interest demonstrates that there isn't much of a defense. That's why the only possible solution involves stripping the councilors of their improperly granted awards.
__________________
Last edited by itsnotabigtruck; 2012-06-23 at 16:44. Reason: adjusted for clarification
 

The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to itsnotabigtruck For This Useful Post: