Hi y’all,
beyond all the hyperbole & outrage - let’s please keep having the constructive part of this debate (how a board should work viz its rules of procedure, consensus building vs. fundamental disagreements - and of course how to move on, once decisions were made).
What should be discussed among the members (if not kept inside the board/MC), is legal briefs. Please take this to tdf-internal, or expect to be moderated.
Best, Thorsten
Fully agree, this behavior is way beyond any boundaries.
My reading of this is that we can discuss the matter as much as we want but the board will not revoke the decision despite having received only negative comments about it and legal advice to revoke it.
What’s the point of even discussing things if the chairman and board members ignore feedback and evidence?
From Daniel and Marina’s posts.
What should outsiders make of the accusations of deletion of parts of other people’s posts? At the very least, if true, it doesn’t look good from the outside trying to understand what is actually happening on the inside.
Hi Alex,
regarding moderation of specific content, see Discuss “Rules of procedure changes” - #6 by webmink why that should be assumed good policy.
I admit it must be frustrating for people watching, having to constantly deal with vague allegations & content moderation.
Then again, please ask those who are trying to use this forum as a public courtroom, by selectively sharing private matter – knowing full-well that me and others will hesitate to counter that with even more leaking of privileged details in our defense – why they don’t use tdf-internal, where we can be much more forthcoming.
Best, Thorsten
Nobody ever disputed that privileged legal information should not be shared.
I’ve checked before publishing the vote and the quotes used are just a confirmation of the issues that have been already reported both in private and in public.
Repeating the same argument that the vote has been taken down because it contained privileged legal information doesn’t hold at all. Then, while I used quotes to keep the rationale short and to the point, I could as well have used my own words and ended the message with “the above has been confirmed by our lawyer” which is also common practice when boards wants to show they went through due diligence.
The result would have not changed, the issues were already public and our lawyer advised us to revoke the vote but some members of the board keep ignoring the criticisms, the obvious issues and legal advice confirming those issues. Stating that some board members cannot defend their position as it would reveal more legal information does not hold as there is no legal documents stating the contrary. Processes to be implemented which affects both board and ESC, which will be published shortly, actually confirm the issues which are also linked to another vote that will be also published shortly.
Instead of going around in circles it would be great if our chairman just acted following taking onboard the criticisms, the confirmation of the issues and revoked that vote.
Indeed, also hidden a message I sent arguing it mentions HR topics.
Unbelievable what both the chair and Cor are doing. And, of course, unacceptable.
ass=“gmail_quote”>