Dear Community,

SD69 is just playing with words twisting them beyond the point of recognition to support his opinion. The unfortunate fact is that we fell for it and fed him with more words to twist. I'll change the tune now, I hope it's not too late to appeal to your intelligence and ability to judge.

On a meeting back when SD69 wasn't even a HiFo board director, the board decided to appoint the council. Do you really believe that they appointed the Maemo Community Council to do it's regular job? Or that by a slip of the hand of the meetong minutes author the term Hildon Foundation Council was omitted, and HiFo as it should, and as was way more logical, appointed a HiFo council early on, which was incidentally (what would be better?) the fresh MCC?


Now on the word appoint, what do you think? That the bylaws have the 7 day clause just for the sake of the rule? Or to ensure that the Foundation doesn't remain directorless for long? If Mr. Bauer's explanation is indeed right then he could have appointed Pope Francis as Diector and no further action would be required. Is this likely to be the spirit of that clause? Is this a foundation you want serving maemo.org?


Lastly, on elections. What do you think is the purpose of the clause that allows either body to cause elections for both bodies? Do you think that our call for elections for both bodies serves the spirit of that clause even if we (according to Mr. Bauer) are not the HiFo Council, especially when the general gist of the community member's comments AND the explicit opinion of 2/3 of the board directors is in favor of elections? Do you think it is an unofficial act, or that the board should take it seriously and call it's own elections anyway saving us all from the discussion and delays?


Thank you for reading,

Michael Demetriou,
council member