A note from the openSUSE board

Posted Jan 15, 2011 18:39 UTC (Sat) by nlucas (guest, #33793)
Parent article: A note from the openSUSE board

They should at least made a resume of the charges, not necessarily with the full facts, but the real points that led to this, like pointing the paragraphs of the "Guiding Principles" that were in dispute.

I can agree with the non-disclosure decision in relation with the real persons involved, but (if I were an OpenSuse member) I would like to know if the decision was correct in my point of view. If it wasn't then I could decide to not vote for them in the next election.

How can someone tell if it was a subjective (could be something that was bad in some cultures and not in others) or a real transgression (direct crossing of a major guideline)?

I'm not implying nothing in here. I'm sure it was a good decision to reach this point, but they are acting like a military tribunal in relation to transparency.

A note from the openSUSE board

Posted Jan 18, 2011 0:45 UTC (Tue) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

How can someone tell if it was a subjective (could be something that was bad in some cultures and not in others) or a real transgression (direct crossing of a major guideline)?

Subjective or not, if you ignore people in authority who are telling you to "watch your step", then you shouldn't be surprised.

Eastern cultures tend to exaggerate respect for the boss. Western cultures, even if the boss is the worst kind of PHB, you don't push him too far.

As I read the story, this person basically pushed the people in authority to breaking point, ignoring veiled and not-so-veiled warnings. Culture be damned, that's gross stupidity in ANY culture.

Cheers,
Wol