The Potential Recruits can't see an article in the submission queue that discusses (in the editorial comments) among other things taking legal action in order to precipitate change. In my opinion this would do nothing but harm to all involved, and I do not share this goal. Nor do most of the respondents who are participating in the discussion.
It has become obvious to me that the only meaningful dialog has to include PJ. She is the only single individual who start the process to bring about closure to the situation. None of us, the Potential Recruits, nor AllParadox can do anything but speculate.
It has been suggested to collaborate on something like an open letter to PJ, outlining the concerns of people who have them. This would need to be done very tactfully, and in my opinion it should start everyone involved in a different direction.
Would this be a worthwhile endeavor? What exactly are the goals, or "demands", of everyone here? What would you like to see resolved, and how? What exactly would like PJ to do to make you happy? What would you Potential Recruits like to see us do? Is there any point to attempting reconciliation, or is everyone beyond that point? Are we interested in ratcheting down the hubris, or not? --- DISCLAIMER: IANAL, may have no idea what the heck I am talking about, yadda yadda yadda.
~ Merkey v The Internet et al Docs ~ Yahoeuvre ~ tuxrocks.com (SCO cases legal docs) ~ scofacts.org ~ eagle.petrofsky.org ~ Zen's Den ~ Yahoo SCOX Message Board ~ Lamlaw ~ Microsoft Watch ~ Groklaw ~ Korgwal - a Groklaw mirror ~ nosoftwarepatents.com ~ Flame Warriors ~ SCOXE Wars ~ Get your Merkey Number here! ~ Digital Law Online
Make a new account