On 11/10/2010 11:26 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
My proposal would be rather to write a set of rules that each country
has to pass to be eligible to host an event. That would have more sense
IMHO, and will be probably more effective.
That is incredibly difficult to evaluate, because you get into
On 11/10/2010 10:35 AM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
On 11/10/10 16:11 , John Goerzen wrote:
On 11/10/2010 07:15 AM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
On 11/10/10 14:00 , David Graham wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Adrian Bunk wrote:
You don't need a code of conduct for going to the police and report a
On 11/10/2010 07:00 AM, David Graham wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Adrian Bunk wrote:
You don't need a code of conduct for going to the police and report a
crime.
I come down firmly only the side of Adrian on this.
It is totally inappropriate for any event organisation to have to put
out a code
On 11/10/2010 07:15 AM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
On 11/10/10 14:00 , David Graham wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Adrian Bunk wrote:
You don't need a code of conduct for going to the police and report a
crime.
I come down firmly only the side of Adrian on this.
Amen. I would boycot events which
On Wed March 12 2008 12:14:47 pm Bruce Perens wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Ah, so all that stuff *you* helped write into the original SPI charter
> > about serving the greater OSS community was a bunch of BS, then? You
> > never meant it?
>
> Those are wonderful goals, not a bunch of BS at all.
On Wed March 12 2008 10:38:46 am MJ Ray wrote:
> The detail of the www team's extent or powers seems a bit too hazy to
> rely on those. Is it just the listed members (debwww group IIRC), the
> core WWW Team (webwml) or the listed address [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please, MJ. This has NO PLACE on an SPI
On Tue October 23 2007 12:09:35 pm Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 09:26:36AM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> > "associated" with SPI in the sense used above, but for which SPI
> > accepts earmarked donations and whose funds we spend out or forward to
> > another non-profit as
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 11:01:19AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> [John Goerzen]
> > I have been using the Spamhaus RBL for *years* and have yet to have
> > had a false positive with it.
> >
> > And this on systems that process far more mail than SPI.
>
&
On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 09:36:05AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [...], reject with some rbl lists[3] [...]
> > [3] [bogusmx|dsn].rfc-ignorant.org, blackhole.securityusage.com,
> > sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org, relays.ordb.org, opm.blitzed.org,
> > list.dsbl.or
On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 03:14:18AM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 10815 March 1977, John Goerzen wrote:
>
> > Quick question: opm.blitzed.org says that it was discontinued in May,
> > and I couldn't find securityusage.com. Do you have any further info on
> > t
On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 01:36:06AM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> [1] with automated whitelisting after you got 5 mails sent in
> [2] not done during smtp time. We accept mail but kill silently if it
> has a spamassassin score above 10 or is a virus
> [3] [bogusmx|dsn].rfc-ignorant.org, blackhol
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 07:09:09PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>
> Now, after we changed the MTAs installed on SPIs machines from Exim4 to
> Postfix, together with some filters, which already seems to have dropped
> the amount of spam received[1], we just did the final step to close our
> lists fo
On July 17, 2006, David Graham wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > Russ Nelson wrote:
> > > The current board may feel differently
> > I last proposed a motion to give the domain OSI in April 2005. I think
> > it was not seconded.
>
> It was addressed at the July 26th, 2005 meeti
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 04:28:51PM -0400, Russ Nelson wrote:
> Josh Berkus writes:
> > I personally can't imagine the PostgreSQL project requesting anything that
> > wasn't "software in the public interest" related.
>
> I personally can't imagine the Open Source Initiative doing anything
> that
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 02:32:37PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > On Sun, 16 Jul 2006, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > > I last proposed a motion to give the domain OSI in April 2005. I think
> > > it was not seconded.
> >
> > It was addressed at the July 26th, 2005 m
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 01:40:40PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> > First off, SPI already HAS a relationship with a CPA. Please google
> > for cpa site:spi-inc.org. The board also authorized this while you
> > were on it. In short, between our legal counsel and bookeepeing firm,
> > plus that C
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 01:32:15PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> We have a certified book keeper (my wife actually ;)). She handles all
> AR/AP, office adminstrative stuff etc...
>
> We have a CPA that we work closely with. That CPA handles anything and
> everything to do with taxes and payrol
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 11:11:32AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> The most important thing we've done about money management in the last
> several years has been to hire a professional book-keeper. The next
> important task for the coming year, IMO, is hiring a CPA. Doing these
First off, SPI alread
On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 05:54:57PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Hi,
AJ, thank you for these eloquent remarks. You've made a lot of good
points, and I wish I had realized some of them back during the Java
debate.
I think SPI is one of the least understood gifts Debian has given to the
community,
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:40:02AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> > But I don't really see how a seat on the SPI board helps you oppose them
> > more effectively
> It's important to get SPI and its members and especially its board more
> involved in issues. This is not just
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 10:19:36AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> John Goerzen wrote:
> > According to Apache, your platform was last modified on the public
> >
> Not my platform. The vote page at
> http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/votes/vote5/nominations/ . It appeared
&g
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:44:32AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> John Goerzen wrote:
> > Why do you call me on the carpet for replying to a public document about a
> > candidate?
> Because you did it before the document was made public. You knew that it
> would shortly b
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:44:32AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> John Goerzen wrote:
> > Why do you call me on the carpet for replying to a public document about a
> > candidate?
> Because you did it before the document was made public. You knew that it
> would shortly b
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 12:08:49PM -0400, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> I care a whole lot about SPI -- probably as much as you do. I also
> decided not to run this year because I thought that some new energy and
> the potential for more actively engaged board members would do the
> organization some go
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:19:26AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > It clearly insinuated that due to John's criticism of you, you felt that
> > you couldn't trust him to run an election.
> It was improper process for an election. Especially the posting on
> spi-general before my platform was posted
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 07:51:40AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >How many of them? Why did you not offer apologies in advance?
> Actually, I was distressed to find the IRC logs were not online, as I
Actually, they are. Linked to from every Board agenda that is posted on
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 07:18:19AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Members of longer standing have access to spi-private and can judge this
> for themselves. I went through my communication from you, and can't
> really say I agree. We've had contact on two issues in recent time. I'd
> also like you
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 12:35:10PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 21:09 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > I've bit my tongue about you for a few years now, out of respect for a
> > fellow candidate for the board, a fellow member of it, and out of a
> &
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 08:26:14PM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> I wish you'd step back a bit and cool off. I recognize that I can get
> people annoyed, thus I'll apologize. I also wish you had taken up this
> discussion when we could have done something about it, instead of
> bottling it up to
Bruce Perens wrote at
http://www.spi-inc.org/secretary/votes/vote5/nominations/BrucePerens.txt:
> I know of few people who do as much for Free Software as I. You can see
I could name hundreds that do more, and that's just people that I know
of that post on debian-devel. All I've seen you do lat
Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wonder if SPI would be willing to take LUGs as projects. I have two LUGs
> in my area that might be interested in getting tax-deductable donations
> and have some official status.
>
> How about websites and email lists for LUGs?
At first, I was t
31 matches
Mail list logo
