Hi, Am Freitag, 13. März 2020, 23:15:31 CET schrieb Christian Boltz:
Again, please read carefully what I wrote:
How did the board's email did not respect your wish to not be asked questions?
Wrong question ;-) Maybe read your own previous mail again, especially this part: (copied from above and somewhat shortened)
... some people ... did not respect the clearly stated wish of both former members not to tell the details.
I could easily argue that "some people == the remaining board members".
Maybe. But that's not what I meant. I was referring to the questions which started way before the board's statement. And the remaining board members weren't the ones poking you and Sarah with questions - and therefore not respecting your wish.
The board statement Marina sent out matches exactly what you wrote - it contained some things [1] the board had promised to keep confidential.
...after Sarah herself made some bits public here and even more already on February 11th on the public Telegram group. Both put fuel to the fire of questions. To phrase it more abstract and exaggerated: The person to be protected damages her own protection twice and the group held accountable for protection is getting flak. As you know I wasn't involved in the whole story until that statement [1] and therefore would consider myself unbiased. Additionally I don't know in detail what happened. Yet I could only see three options to handle that situation: 1) Go full public 2) Let go and leave the community with their open questions 3) The board's chosen midway All of them are shitty somehow, just the amount of shittyness varies imho. So I'm curious with all seriousness: Which one would you have picked? Cheers, vinz. [1] https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-project/2020-02/msg00095.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org