I guess we have had this conversation already. I have repeatedly criticized the idea of openness being defined only in a sense that they really would need to publish all internal memos, discussions and even office gossip, spending at least half of their time discussing them with the community even if there is nothing relevant to disclose. I don't see how it could contribute to having releases and products out of the door faster, which is what they need to do. I also have hard time believing that investors would see it as money well spent. But of course, if someone prefers purposeless discussion as a token of "openness" instead of delivery... Those are the very same reasons I have begun to question the whole idea of openness itself.

And if the hostility towards Jolla seen at times here is a "gentle tap on the shoulder", I guess they don't really need an enemy... you know, "the better way" can many times be the worse way.